Translating means-end research into advertising strategy using the meccas model

Journal title ECONOMIA AGRO-ALIMENTARE
Author/s Daniel Eberhard
Publishing Year 2017 Issue 2017/3 Language English
Pages 24 P. 333-356 File size 292 KB
DOI 10.3280/ECAG2017-003003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper illustrates the translation of actual research data of a meansend analysis into concrete advertising strategies using the so called "means-end conceptualization of the components of advertising strategy" - commonly referred to as "meccas" model. In this case, an underlying study examined buying motives of male German recreational athletes with regards to anabolic supplements using the means-end approach. By applying the meccas model, i.e. translating the different layers of the cumulated means-end chains of this study into elements of advertising, six print-advertising strategies were developed in cooperation with a professional graphic studio. Practical applications of the meccas model with regards to its original intent of developing advertising strategies have been conducted very rarely in a scientific context. This case study will pose an illustrative example for researchers and marketers alike and also lay basis for further scrutiny of means-end theory in general.

Keywords: Means-end chains, meccas, laddering, advertising

Jel codes: M31, M37

  1. Kelly, G.A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203405970
  2. Kloss, I. (2007), Werbung. Munich, Germany: Vahlen. DOI: 10.1515/9783486812428
  3. Kroeber-Riel, W. & Esch, F.-R. (1993). Strategie und Technik der Werbung. Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer.
  4. Meffert, H. (2008). Marketing. Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/987-3-8349-9584-1
  5. Mottram, D.R. (1988). Supplement use in Sport. In: Mottram, D.R. (Ed.), Drugs in Sport. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203471890
  6. Olson, J.C. & Reynolds, T.J. (1983). Understanding Consumers’ Cognitive Structures: Implications for Advertising Strategy. In: Percy, L. & Woodside, A. (Eds.), Advertising and Consumer Psychology. Lanham, New Jersey: Rowman & Littlefield.
  7. Olson, J.C. & Reynolds, T.J. (2001). The Means-End Approach to Understanding Customer Decision Making. In: Reynolds, T.J. & Olson, J.C. (Eds.), Understanding Customer Decision Making. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  8. Reynolds, T.J. & Craddock, A.B. (1988). The Application of the meccas model to the development and assessment of advertising strategy. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(2), 43-54.
  9. Reynolds, T.J. & Gutman, J. (1984). Advertising is Image Management. Journal of Advertising Research, 2(1), 27-37.
  10. Reynolds, T.J. & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis & interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(1), 11-31.
  11. Reynolds, T.J. & Rochon, J.P. (1991). Means-End Based Advertising Research: Copy Testing Is Not Strategy Assessment. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 131-142. DOI: 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90047-2
  12. Reynolds, T.J., Dethloff, C. & Westberg, S.J. (2001a). Advancements in Laddering. In: Reynolds, T.J. & Olson, J.C. (Eds.), Understanding Customer Decision Making. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  13. Reynolds, T.J., Withlark, D.B. & Wirthlin, R.B. (2001b). Effectively translating indepth Consumer Understanding into Communications Strategy and Advertising Practice. In: Reynolds, T.J. & Olson, J.C. (Eds.). Understanding Customer Decision Making. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  14. Reynolds, T.J., Olson, J.C. & Rochon, J.P. (2009). A Strategic Approach to Measuring Advertising Effectiveness. In: Wells, W.D. (Ed.), Measuring advertising effectiveness. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI: 10.4324/9781315806099
  15. Rossiter, J.R. & Percy, L. (1999). The A-b-e Model of Benefit Focus in Advertising. Australian Graduate School of Management Working Paper Series, 99(2), 1-49.
  16. Sampson, P. (1972). Using the Repertory grid test. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(1), 78-81. DOI: 10.2307/3149614
  17. Schiffmann, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L. (2009). Consumer Behavior. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
  18. Schreiber, G. & Schrattenecker, G. (1995). Werbung. Stuttgart, Germany: UTB.
  19. Soh, H., Reid, L.N. & King, K.W. (2007). Trust In Different Advertising Media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(3), 455-476. DOI: 10.1177/107769900708400304
  20. Weinberger, M.G. & Gulas, C.S. (1992). The impact of humor in advertising: A review. Journal of Advertising, 21(4), 35-39. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.1992.10673384
  21. Atkinson, M. (2007). Playing With Fire: Masculinity, Health and Sports Supplements. Sociology of Sport Journal, 24(2), 165-186.
  22. Audenaert, A. & Steenkamp, J.M. (1997). Means-end chain theory and laddering in agricultural marketing research. Proceedings of the 49th European Association of Agricultural Economists (eaae) Seminar, 19-21 February 1997, Bonn, Germany, 217-230. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4615-6273-3_11
  23. Belch, G.E. & Belch, M.A. (2001). Advertising and Promotion: An integrated Marketing Communications Perspective. Boston, Massachusetts: McGraw-Hill.
  24. Blythe, J. (2008). Consumer Behaviour. Los Angeles, California: Sage.
  25. DeLorme, D.E., Huh, J., Reid, L.N. & An, S. (2012). Dietary supplement advertising in the US: A review. International Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 547-577.
  26. Eberhard, D. & Fantapié Altobelli, C. (2014). Buying Motives for Anabolic Supplements – An Analysis among German Recreational Athletes. Sport and Art, 2(5), 75-84.
  27. Esch, F.-R. (2004). Strategie und Technik der Markenführung. Munich, Germany: Vahlen. DOI: 10.15358/9783800648573
  28. Gengler, C.E. & Reynolds, T.J. (1995). Consumer Understanding and Advertising Strategy: Analysis and Strategic Translation of Laddering Data. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4), 19-33.
  29. Ghura, D. & Schrimper, R.A. (1992). Newspaper Advertising of Apples in North Carolina: Characteristics and Comparisons across Cities and Time. 1989 Commodity Advertising and Promotion Conference Paper, February 1989, Ames, Iowa, 3-23.
  30. Gutman, J. & Reynolds, T.J. (1979). An Investigation of the Levels of Cognitive Abstraction utilized by Consumers in Product Differentiation. In: Eighney, J. (Ed.), Attitude Research under the Sun. Chicago, Illinois: American Marketing Association.
  31. Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 60-72. DOI: 10.2307/3203341
  32. Gutman, J. (1991). Exploring the Nature of Linkages between Consequences and Values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 143-148. DOI: 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90048-3
  33. Grunert, K.G., Beckmann, S.C. & Sørensen, E. (1995). Means-End Chains and Laddering: An Inventory of Problems and an Agenda for Research. Center for Market Surveillance Working Paper, no. 34, November. Aarhus, Denmark: The Aarhus School of Business.
  34. Jaeger, S.R., & MacFie, H.J.H. (2001). Incorporating “Health” into Promotional Messages for Apples: A Means-End Theory Approach. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 6(4), 27-52.

  • Driving participation and investment in B2B trade shows: The organizer view Roberto Mora Cortez, Wesley J. Johnston, Srinath Gopalakrishna, in Journal of Business Research /2022 pp.1092
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.028
  • Methodological considerations on the means‐end chain analysis revisited Fleur B. M. Kilwinger, Ynte K. van Dam, in Psychology & Marketing /2021 pp.1513
    DOI: 10.1002/mar.21521

Daniel Eberhard, Translating means-end research into advertising strategy using the meccas model in "ECONOMIA AGRO-ALIMENTARE" 3/2017, pp 333-356, DOI: 10.3280/ECAG2017-003003