Marketing scientist Kevin Gray interviewed by renowned marketing professor Byron Sharp...

 

KG: Can you give us a brief summary of marketing and its development so far to inform the readers?

 

Byron Sharp: Humans have been dealing with commerce for a very long time, but marketing began with agriculture in some areas about 15,000 years ago. Agriculture created a surplus of goods, and some groups had a surplus of one product (such as wheat) and a shortage of another product (such as meat). The differentiation of the characteristics of the groups developed trade, and this trade led to specialization in production. No one could have predicted that the trade would grow to an astonishing extent. This situation, together with a great increase in population growth, also started scientific and industrial revolutions by developing specialization. We can say that it caused the first civilizations such as Egypt, Rome and China. It is astonishing that this “commercial revolution” is still going on bigger than before and spawning high-level specialties (like marketing science) and today we produce more food using less land than ever before!

 

Another important development was the emergence of mass communication (such as print, radio, TV) and chain stores in the last century. This revolution is still going on especially in developed countries . This situation especially enabled the formation of a global brand. This has had many positive effects as well… Brands empowered consumers because they understood that only this way could they be quality and consistent. Firms have also invested in quality, consistency and high reach, and brands have thus made sustainable profits for decades.

 

The third major impact was the gradual use of the scientific approach in its application to marketing. I'm not talking about quality statistics. I'm talking about validating marketing beliefs and practices with real, genuine evidence. Science has transformed every discipline it has touched.

 

KG: You work with different companies in many parts of the world. Do you see differences in the way marketing is conducted? More or less the same or different in what respects?

 

 

BS: I see big differences in complexity on a sectoral basis. For example, there are old sectors such as banks and universities that have just started to work in a truly competitive market, which also had a regional or legal monopoly. Undecided about product development, struggling with pricing and not understanding how advertising works, or incapable of using the media effectively… Despite this, some brands have high marketing budgets.

 

KG: You're known as a staunch critic of marketers' effective practices. What mistakes do you think marketers make the most? And what are the consequences of these errors?

 

BS: In the absence of information, myths pop up – instantly! People are very good at making up stories and making themselves believe something. History is full of false ideas that were long assumed to be true. Even today, when we look back, “how absurd!” We have believed for centuries in the ideas we will approach. Some continue even today!

 

Therefore, a Roman general choosing a pecking chicken; As meaningful as it is for a Chinese architect to worry about feng-shui or a head of state to have his or her fortune told, the ideas considered as "effective marketing practices" are just as valid.

 

The biggest mistakes marketers make are because they don't know what we're discovering about buying habits and brand performance. Let me give an example: I call it the "marketer's behavior problem." This is an approach that requires changing the consumer's belief and behavior. If people do not recycle their garbage, we should make them more sensitive about the environment and make them believe that landfills are very harmful. If enough people are not buying our brand, we need to convince people that our brand is right for them and say that we are better than other alternative brands. This approach leads us to a persuasive advertising approach.

 

But before all this, there is a lot of brand positioning, brand personality, consumer motivation, brand DNA, etc. analyzes are being made (or should I say paralysis?). Marketers worry about which media/media to use, instead of who to reach and when, they look at whether the medium/media fits the brand's personality. They miss important opportunities, such as making the brand easier to see on the shelf. There is a large industry that believes (even falsely) that behavior reduces sales. They say that sales will explode if we can magically convince people that our brand is the best option… Even those who admire behavioral economics have this sought-after buying habit. It's pretty easy to drag things in the wrong direction if you unconsciously have the wrong assumptions!