Participate by engaging in a discussion with your colleagues, replying to each other’s posts: Constructively critique their assessment of the 4Ps marketing mix. Remember to justify your responses. Expand upon the topic with your own insights and findings from the independent research you have done. Reflect upon ways in which your classmates’ posts may have reshaped your own views. Ask clarifying questions. _____________________________________________________________________ Yusuf Top of Form Introduction O’Malley & Patterson (1998, p. 840) declare that the 4P’s approach has reached the vanishing point as it is distant to customer interests through its push principle with the focus on hitting customers with something than catering towards customer’s needs. I can agree with the argument that the marketing mix management requires a new paradigm given the new, in particular digital, dynamics, such as the impact of crowdsourcing (Laureate Education, 2014). I want to argue that the marketing strategy of an organization should be coherent to the Company’s overall strategy, which in cases might resonate most with the 4P’s than trying to get fancy for the sake of riding on most modern marketing trends. One size does not fit all Kotler & Keller (2012) articulate that each product life-cycle requires a different marketing strategy considering the 4P paradigm. It starts with offering products based on cost plus pricing and distributing selectively to build awareness in the introduction phase. The transition into growth and maturity phase focus on portfolio and distribution expansion to reach the mass market to beat the competition and differentiate. In the decline stage, the marketing strategy should be dealing with phasing out the product. That sets the basic direction in regards to the marketing strategy. However, it has to be compatible with the corporation’s overall strategy. Daft et al. (2014) refer to Porter’s competitive strategy, which distinguishes a differentiation strategy from a low-cost leadership. While the first organizational design choice gears heavily towards learning orientation, flexibility, and incorporation of structures that enable customer intimacy (example: Apple), the latter is efficiency orientated, with tight cost control, efficient procurement systems, etc. An alignment of the marketing strategy to the purpose and design choice of the corporation becomes imperative. Walmart, the biggest retailer, is using an unchanged marketing mix that rests on the 4P’s for their expansion and proof enough performance to argue repetition (Ferguson, 2017). It’s Everyday Low Price (EDLP) pricing strategy with additive sales promotions to attract a large population to drive to their numerous stores is a working formula. Neglecting that core principle in exchange for something fancier such as a resource intense customer intimacy might sacrifice either earnings/profits or the EDLP pricing strategy. Parson (2017) emphasizes that Marketers should continue to influence all four traditional P’s as they are still critical to understand customer needs. A marketer should affect pricing based on understanding customer’s sensitivity to it. Decisions on place might become a tradeoff of costs vs. experience, and eliminating product input will only hit the innovation piece for the sake of change. He argues that the most successful companies place their trust on marketers to have a balanced focus on product, sales, and customers. Conclusion I do not think that the 4P’s can be declared as outdated as its use is depended on the strategic choice corporations make and its authentic/coherent execution. References: Internal: Kotler, P. & Keller, K.L. (2012) Framework for marketing management. 5th edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Laureate Education (2014) Social media conversations and crowdsourcing [Video, Online]. (Accessed: 8 July 2017). O’Malley, L. & Patterson, M. (1998) ‘Vanishing point: the mix management paradigm re-viewed’, Journal of Marketing Management, 14 (8), pp. 829-851. Daft, R.L., Murphy, J. & Willmott, H. (2014) Organization Theory and Design: An International Perspective, 2nd ed. Cengage Learning. External: Cleverism (2017) ‘7Ps of Marketing – Additional Elements of Marketing mix’ [online]. (Accessed: 8 July 2017). Available at: Ferguson, E. (2017) ‘Walmart’s Marketing Mix (4Ps) Analysis & Recommendations’ Panmore institute. [online] (Accessed: 8 July 2017). Available at: Parsons, R. (2017) ‘Marketers should take control of all ‘4Ps’. Marketingweek. [online] (Accessed: 8 July 2017). Available at:

    Dear Yusuf?

    The evidence you’ve exhibited provides an interesting viewpoint towards chaffering matrix manoeuvre and the entities compromised in the dynamics of the vulgar similarity. Conjuncture you discuss ce the kindred of the 4Ps in the synchronous interest functioning and chaffering matrix, your evidence fails to declaration and elucidate how each of the 4Ps relates with the chaffering strategies. The entity of emanation, appraisement, assign, and furtherance fails to be adequately elucidateed in the plea why your judgment differs from the deed in-reference-to them substance outdated. Hence, as they ought to be delivered profitless to counterbisect the exhibit chaffering strategies asserting O’Malley & Patterson (1998) evidence that they are no longer inherent.

    As ce the clarification, I would keep approved your evidence further if it discussed some of the exhibit chaffering matrix strategies such as the SDL, relation chaffering, and co-creation of estimate. An interpretation of these chaffering strategies helps whitewash the changing dynamics that would deliver the 4Ps non-essential.

    Conclusively, I coincide with you that the 4Ps are stationary inherent and an great bisect of chaffering matrix strategies. The similarity to chaffering by companies relies on the appraisement, as either ultimate does referable countenance the customers, thus, must be regulated (Kotler & Keller, 2012). The geographical residuum – assign is inherent ce the limb target chaffer, conjuncture, furtherance woos further customers to acquisition the emanation. Also, the emanation is great as it controls the co-creation of estimate to the plummet of consumer desires.


    Internal Sources

    Kotler, P. & Keller, K.L. (2012). Framework ce Chaffering Skill. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice HallExternal.

    O’Malley, L. & Patterson, M. (1998) ‘Vanishing point: the knead skill paradigm re-viewed’, Journal of Chaffering Skill, 14 (8), pp. 829-851.