Words: 1280
Many services marketers strongly maintain that service marketing is essentially efferent from product marketing and that different skills are involved. However, many traditional product marketers disagree, saying, “Good marketing is Good marketing. ” This assignment provides a summary of the description of the debate ‘Is Service Marketing Deferent from Product Marketing? ‘ Indications of possible views, demonstrate the application, and recognize the business Implication/coalescence. Being part of the sales engineering and business development In the OLL and gas Industry for eight years, It has always been one that Is very service oriented.
Even hen selling a product it is always accompanied by a service and the quality of the service is what really makes the difference of the repeat purchase. During my career, mentors in my field have always had the opinion that services are marketed different from products. Their general consensus was marketing of products and services are two dissimilar situations which require two very diverse strategies. However, since I started the course the literature shows the clear difference how products and services are viewed, but the marketing principles by scholars are viewed somewhat insistently for both products and services.
Hence, my Interest is peeked by whether or not what I have been thought and held true for many years is or isn’t valid. The first view by many marketers who believe there Is no disparity In marketing a product or service Is ‘Marketing Is Marketing’. Consumers buy a product or use a service to answer a particular need or want. The customer’s value hierarchy: The customers’ decision-making process and their own consumption system do not change when purchasing a service versus a product. Typically, customers may value any aspects of an exchange, which may involve a product, brand, store or interaction with a salesperson (e. . , Holbrook 1194; Alai 1995 Estimate AWAY. ‘Furthermore, customer value perceptions may occur throughout all stages of consumption (Huber and Herrmann 2000}. From this view we can conclude marketing for either goods or services will not make difference in the customer decision-making process. On the other hand, the essential difference universally cited by authors (e. G. , Battens 1977; Berry 1980; Lovelace 1981; Earthmen 1966, 1974; Stack 1977 (a) IS Intangibility. Because services are performances, rather than objects, they cannot be seen, felt, tasted, or touched In the same manner In which goods can be sensed.
Intangibility, according to Battens (1979) is the critical goods – services distinction from the consumer; the variability of service from encounter to encounter; and the fact that the service is perishable all create new and different marketing challenges for the service marketer. Since the customer must be present during the production of the service (haircuts, airplane trips), inseparability “forces the buyer into intimate intact with the production process” (Carmen and Language 1980, p. 8).
This fundamentally unique difference between goods and services is what has made many marketers conclude the approach to marketing must be different. A second passionate point held by scholars who are of the view ‘good marketing is good marketing’ is that consumers come to understand the core benefit, potential product, or the functionality of the service is based upon branded marketing theory. Whether tangible or intangible, good marketing is Just that ‘good marketing. In entrant the service marketer must make an “intangible” tangible. G.
Lynn Stack (1977) says ‘it is wrong to imply that services are Just like products “except” for intangibility. By such logic apples are Just like oranges, except for their “apple-news”. ‘ One can concur from her view marketing should clearly be done differently for product and service. In addition, making variability consistent is most important for service companies. Non-standardization concerns the potential for high variability in the performance of services. The quality and essence of a service (a medical examination, car rental, and restaurant meal) can vary from producer to producer, from customer to customer and from day to day.
This means marketing must be considered differently to account for these variability. In addition, expert marketers who hold firm saying there is no difference in marketing a product or service reflect on the ups. Product, place, price, and promotion concepts are still valid for both products and services, although with some changes in either their weight in the consumer-decision process or their means of communication to the consumers, but lass the ups remains constant.
Even though the ups remain constant, there is clear differentiation in the type of marketing. Product marketing tends to firstly emphasize on creating intangible associations, whereas service marketers are focused on enhancing and distinguishing “realities” through manipulation and tangible clues. G. Lynn Stack (1977) says the management of evidence comes for service marketers, because service “reality’ is arrived at by the consumer mostly through a process of deduction, based on the total impression that evidence creates.
She further goes on to say ‘because of product marketing biases, service marketers often fail to recognize the unique forms of evidence that they can normally control and fail to see that they should be part of marketing responsibilities. ‘ Experts further say that product and service marketing can be differentiated by ‘management of the environment’. Product supply usually means distribution to outside agents, the marketers has minimal influence in structuring the environment in which the product is sold. Marketers chief controllable impact on that environment is recently product packaging.
Services on the hand are often fully incorporated with environment; that is, the surroundings in which the service is “dispersed” is controllable. G. Lynn Stack (1977) says to the extent possible, management of the marketing in the media is also different. As mentioned before, services elements are intangible. Because they are abstract, the marketer must work hard at making them “real,” by building a case from tangible evidence. The situation revolves around the fact that media (television, radio, print) are one step removed from tangibility. Media, by its Miscellaneous nature, abstracts the physical.
Even though product tangibility provides an anchor for media presentation because a product can be shown, media still abstract products. On the flip-side because of their intangible capabilities, the media frequently make service entities obscure, instead of more real and the service marketer must work against the innate effect. G. Lynn Stack (1977) says ‘unfortunately, many marketers are so familiar with product-oriented thinking that they go down precisely the wrong path and attempt to represent services by dealing tit them in abstractions. In conclusion, according to Valerie A. Estimate, A.
Paranormal, & Leonard L. Berry Ronald of Marketing Volvo. 49 Spring 19850 33-46) ‘Services marketing is becoming a recognized and accepted subset of the marketing discipline. Given the growth of the service sector in economies throughout the world, and the almost universal belief by scholars working in this area that services marketing is in certain key respects different from goods marketing. ‘ It appears the differentiation in marketing for products and services is heavily weighed on services intangibility, iatrogenic, inseparability of production and consumption and permissibility.
And although marketing foundation is based on the ups there are a lot of factors that show new concepts are necessary if service marketing is to succeed and hence service marketing is different from product marketing. G. Lynn Stack (1977) expresses ‘if “either-or” terms (product vs.. Services) do not adequately describe the true nature of marketing entities, it make sense to explore the use fullness of a new structural definition. ‘ She further goes on to say ‘even the most thoughtful attempts o broaden the definition of “that which is marketed” away from product synonymic suffer from an underlying assumption of tangibility.