Communication is a process of creating meaning between two persons. Communicator 1 - Sender/Receiver - Encoding/Decoding - Speaking, and Communicator 2 - Receiver/Sender - Decoding/Encoding - Listening. Communcator 1's half of the cycle is different from Communicator 2's half because of human uniqueness. Emphasis is given to the receiver as listener but the same applies to any situation (Tubbs and Moss, 1994).
Marketing communications are intentional, transactional and symbolic. Words can be denotative, meaning the same to everyone or connotative, meaning something unique to the individual. It is a mistake to think that others think and believe the same as we do. Creating shared meaning involves researching and applying many elements. Certain elements of grammar such as simile, metaphor and allegory may be used to create meaning.
Meaning is to do with the processing of information into concepts that are relevant to the person's experience and useful knowledge. The most effective messages affect the consumer's thought and belief patterns. Perception synthesises information into a world-view so in a sense it is a construct. It is important to position a product right in the consumer's world view. A certain amount of information is filtered out so the world view is incomplete. The remaining information is used to create a cognitive map. Imagination and experience fill in the gaps.
A company's marketing communications depend on credibility. The message will be successful if it is believed. Credibility can depend on the person's perception of the sender. Celebrity endorsement can create a believable link between the product and the celebrity. Meaning is transfered to the product. If the personality of the product matches the personality of the celebrity synergies can be created. People can share in something they like. The likeability of a marketing communication can be an important indicator of product success. Successful communications often contain humour and warmth. Actors in commercials can demonstrate how a product is used, can improve lifestyles or fulfil aspirations. Modelling seems to work but there is debate as to how (Pickton and Broderick, 2001).
Effective communications are those that elicit the intended response from the person/s to whom the message was sent. The drowning man waving wildly to be rescued only to see people to wave back is the last thing a marketer wants. Marketing communications must be understood, influence attitudes, improve relationships and be acted on (Tubbs and Moss, 1994).
Showing posts with label symbol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label symbol. Show all posts
Friday, 13 February 2009
Wednesday, 21 January 2009
Halo And Prophecy Management
Early rejection has been the rule for many people rather than the exception. People who have the same skill set can perform well or badly. Our expectations can influence the impressions we make on others. Those who expect to be accepted and perceive others as friendly are often accepted and popular. The same principle applies with people displaying the opposite factors. A person's psychological set, their expectations or predisposition, helps to confirm a self-fulfilling prophecy (Tubbs and Moss, 1994).
We also tend to expect certain behaviours to go together. How we select and organize information about people creates a private theory of personality often on the basis of very limited information. Filtering and selection of information creates our own personal constructs in comprehending and exploring people and events (Fincham and Rhodes, 1999).
First impressions are very important. Our perception of people can be made on the single impression of an unfavourable or undesirable trait and may be taken to mean that the person has other undesirable traits, shutting out other relevant information (Mullins, 1999). If we aren't careful a bad impression can be vary hard to change. The halo/horns effects are as undesirable as primacy and recency effects. The importance of first impressions and our tendencies to make false assumptions and predictions about behaviour are such that the distortion can lead to the Peter Principle in promotion situations (Kakabadse, Ludlow and Vinnicombe, 1987). Treating people according to first impressions and what you want them to become can create self-fulfilling prophecies. The problem is the positive kind are not as infallible as the negative kind.
The 'target person' can of course respond. We can use tactics to present a certain image of ourselves to the outside world (Arnold, Cooper and Anderson, 1998). Impression management, as it is called, can take place on four fronts: superior, subordinate, specialist and lower participants. Understanding a social situation helps us to perform well in it. Social activity is dynamic and creative and statistics cannot make much of it. We may be unaware of the considerable cognitive achievement automatic social responses represent. Personality from this perspective of impression management is seen as form of social intelligence. Persona describes the social face. Personal fronts are continually monitored in self-presentational activity by making comparisons between the given and the given off. 360 feedback is useful for those with less well marked self-monitoring. Self-awareness differentiates high and low performing individuals. Appearance and manner are also symbolic. We tend to accept another self-definition. Breaking that rule can lead to serious disruption of social interaction and damage another person's integrity (Fincham and Rhodes, 1999).
We cannot be all things to all people. Our perceptions of what other people think of us are a result of self-perception as much as anything else. People may be more influenced by what we say about ourselves than what anyone else might say about us. The credibility and motives of the others may be responsible for it but the potentially most biased source of information may be the most credible. It is therefore necessary to be able to discern accurately the behaviour of the target (Arnold, Cooper and Anderson, 1998).
We also tend to expect certain behaviours to go together. How we select and organize information about people creates a private theory of personality often on the basis of very limited information. Filtering and selection of information creates our own personal constructs in comprehending and exploring people and events (Fincham and Rhodes, 1999).
First impressions are very important. Our perception of people can be made on the single impression of an unfavourable or undesirable trait and may be taken to mean that the person has other undesirable traits, shutting out other relevant information (Mullins, 1999). If we aren't careful a bad impression can be vary hard to change. The halo/horns effects are as undesirable as primacy and recency effects. The importance of first impressions and our tendencies to make false assumptions and predictions about behaviour are such that the distortion can lead to the Peter Principle in promotion situations (Kakabadse, Ludlow and Vinnicombe, 1987). Treating people according to first impressions and what you want them to become can create self-fulfilling prophecies. The problem is the positive kind are not as infallible as the negative kind.
The 'target person' can of course respond. We can use tactics to present a certain image of ourselves to the outside world (Arnold, Cooper and Anderson, 1998). Impression management, as it is called, can take place on four fronts: superior, subordinate, specialist and lower participants. Understanding a social situation helps us to perform well in it. Social activity is dynamic and creative and statistics cannot make much of it. We may be unaware of the considerable cognitive achievement automatic social responses represent. Personality from this perspective of impression management is seen as form of social intelligence. Persona describes the social face. Personal fronts are continually monitored in self-presentational activity by making comparisons between the given and the given off. 360 feedback is useful for those with less well marked self-monitoring. Self-awareness differentiates high and low performing individuals. Appearance and manner are also symbolic. We tend to accept another self-definition. Breaking that rule can lead to serious disruption of social interaction and damage another person's integrity (Fincham and Rhodes, 1999).
We cannot be all things to all people. Our perceptions of what other people think of us are a result of self-perception as much as anything else. People may be more influenced by what we say about ourselves than what anyone else might say about us. The credibility and motives of the others may be responsible for it but the potentially most biased source of information may be the most credible. It is therefore necessary to be able to discern accurately the behaviour of the target (Arnold, Cooper and Anderson, 1998).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)