Marketing warfare strategies

Marketing warfare strategies represent a type of strategy, used in commerce and marketing,

that tries to draw parallels between business and warfare and then applies the principles
of military strategy to business situations, with competing firms considered as analogous to sides
in a military conflict, and market share considered as analogous to territory in dispute. This view
of marketing argues that in mature, low-growth markets, where real GDP growth is negative or
low, commerce operates as a zero-sum game. One participant's gain is possible only at another
participant's expense. Success depends on battling competitors for market share.

The use of marketing warfare strategies

Strategy is the organized deployment of resources to achieve specific objectives, something that
business and warfare have in common. In the 1980s business strategists realized that there was
a vast knowledge base stretching back thousands of years that they had barely examined. They
turned to military strategy for guidance. Military strategy books like The Art of War by Sun
Tzu, On War by von Clausewitz, and The Little Red Book by Mao Zedong became business
classics.
From Sun Tzu they learned the tactical side of military strategy and specific tactical proscriptions.
In regard to what business strategists call "first-mover advantage", Sun Tzu said: "Generally, he
who occupies the field of battle first and awaits an enemy is at ease, he who comes later to the
scene and rushes into the fight is weary." From Von Clausewitz they learned the dynamic and
unpredictable nature of military strategy. Clausewitz felt that in a situation
of chaos and confusion, strategy should be based on flexible principles. Strategy comes not from
formulas or rules of engagement, but from adapting to what he called "friction" (minute-by-minute
events). From Mao Zedong they learned the principles of guerrilla warfare.
The first major proponents of marketing warfare theories were Philip Kotler[2] and J. B. Quinn.[3] In
an early description of business military strategy, Quinn claims that an effective strategy: "first
probes and withdraws to determine opponents' strengths, forces opponents to stretch their
commitments, then concentrates resources, attacks a clear exposure, overwhelms a selected
market segment, builds a bridgehead in that market, and then regroups and expands from that
base to dominate a wider field."
The main marketing warfare books were

 Business War Games by Barrie James, 1985

 Marketing Warfare by Al Ries and Jack Trout, 1986
 Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun by Wess Roberts, 1987
By the turn of the century, marketing warfare strategies had gone out of fashion. It was felt that
they were limiting. There were many situations in which non-confrontational approaches were
more appropriate. The Strategy of the Dolphin was developed in the mid-1990s to give guidance
as to when to use aggressive strategies and when to use passive strategies. Today ,most
business strategists stress that considerable synergies and competitive advantages can be
gained from collaboration, partnering, and co-operation. They stress how to divide up the market
and how to grow the market. Such are the vicissitudes of business theories. Finally, a recent
contribution to understanding and using marketing warfare strategies is the visual business war
game proposed by S. Goria.[4]

Marketing warfare strategies[edit]

 Offensive marketing warfare strategies - They are used to secure competitive
advantages; market leaders, runners-up or struggling competitors are usually
attacked.
 Defensive marketing warfare strategies - They are used to defend competitive
advantages; lessen risk of being attacked, decrease effects of attacks, strengthen
position.
 Flanking marketing warfare strategies - They operate in areas of little importance to
the competitor.
 Guerrilla marketing warfare strategies - Attack, retreat, hide, then do it again, and
again, until the competitor moves on to other markets.
 Position defense: This is a strategy, which utilizes its current position. And can be a
weak disadvantage against the attacking opposition. In a business context this is a
strategy usually applied when a company has a dominant stake in the market place
this is usually a monopolized and controlled industry. Marketing with this type of
strategy can be identified through barriers of entry. This is where a company has
fortified its position by having key strongholds in the Marketing segment or brand
identity or product familiarity. They may apply these areas through increasing the
equity of the brand or repeat purchases other wise known as customer loyalty
strategies (Shayne, Milligan. 2012)[5]. E.g. Starbucks as a café giant promoted the
free wifi connection to protect their market share against the competition that had first
applied the concept (Jamie, Burns. 2013).[6]
 Mobile defense: By moving resources and creating new strategies and tactics the
intended goal is to create a moving target that is difficult to attack by the opposition.
This also equips the defense to repel any attacks the opposition has in stored. The
interpretation in business explained by Shayne Milligan is when businesses introduce
new products, replacement products, modifying existing products and repositioning
products as well as changing the marketing segments, target markets or changing
promotional focus. This type of defensive strategy is most likely incorporated by
entrepreneurial companies with strong marketing research and marketing skills along
with the ability to continuously develop their product line (Shayne Milligan. 2012). [7]
 Flanking position: By re-deploying your resources to discourage any type of
flanking attack. This in business terms is developing new products in a marketing
segment that you occupy. By expanding resources the business is able to strengthen
their hold on the segment under threat (Shayne Milligan. 2012).[8] E.g. Absolute
vodka had found a marketing segment that was leased served. In doing so they were
able to capture this market by increasing prices by promoting premium vodka this
tackled their competition Smirnoff in a space they did not allocate resources towards.
This is known as Flanking marketing compared to the strategy of flanking position
this was a successful attack towards the opposition (Jamie Burns. 2013).[9]
 Counter offence: This initially involves counterattacking the opposition that has
attacked you. In business context this is where a counterattack is made on the
oppositions weakest point (Shayne Milligan. 2012).[10] Pre-emptive attack on any
business must have some type of counter re-action this could be a move by the
competition into its sales territory, price cutting, promotional blitz or product
improvements. When faced with these competitive signs the options can be frontal
deployment of resources by strategically developing new products or improving on
products. The other option is finding the oppositions weakest point, which in military
terms would be attacking the competitions main territory. E.g. Central DuPage a
suburban hospital located in Chicago had been under invasion by competitors.
Primary and urgent care centres had moved into the local suburban area and with
the population rising it became and opportunity not just for the Central hospital
DuPage but also for their competitors. In order for the local hospital to protect its
share in the market it had to develop new physician offices located in under served
areas. This was a counter offence by re-positioning themselves they were able to
take in patients through their newly allocated offices where the physicians could refer
their patients to the Central DuPage hospital (Naresh, K Malhotra. 1988).[11]
 Frontal attack: This strategy is specifically designed to engage the opposition with a
head-on frontal assault. This also means using a substantial amount of resources
and financial commitment when taking on a competitor with this strategy. From
marketing to the production process, all elements are activated when initiating such
an abrasive move. Advertising campaigns and new products are usually intensified to
take on the competition where they are strongest; this is to weaken their market
share and margins by cutting off their leading products and influencing their targeted
audience to re-evaluate their loyalty to the brand or product. It is rare to encounter
such strategies, as the process is quite expensive and time-consuming; this is also a
high-risk venture if the competition has a strong counteroffensive attack, which can
leave the attacking opponent open to counterstrikes. With resources already
stretched this strategy is not for the faint-hearted. Shayne Milligan explains that this
type of strategy is only used when the market space is homogenous, brand equity is
low, customer loyalty is low, products are poorly differentiated, the competitor has
relatively low resources or the attacker has stronger resources (Shayne Milligan.
2013).[12] E.g. In 2011 the US shopping giant Target had entered the Canadian
market with financial investments exceeding 4.4 billion dollars. Part of this initial
investment was allocated towards purchasing 220 previously acquired stores of
Zellers, a local Canadian merchandising mogul. With almost 10 million being spent
on the refurbishing of each store as well as the hiring of 150–200 employees per
store, the financial forecast for the Target Corporation was estimated to be around 6
billion per year by the year of 2017. This was not to be the case, as Target's initiating
year in the Canadian retail market failed to achieve any realistic financial goals. Even
though the success of Target's US stores were still in effect, the underestimated
planning into the Canadian market was due to unforeseen economic variables as
well as Canadian loyalty to stores also owned by US parent companies Wal-Mart and
Costco, etc. Such competition had put the Target Corporation in a position at risk of
making more losses than profits, which would also effect their US-based stores.
Taking on Wal-Mart and other foreign and domestic competition has been
unsuccessful, but Target continues to move towards dominating some part of the
Canadian retail market (2015).[13]
 Envelopment strategy or encirclement strategy: This strategy is more broadly
used as it focuses on subtle offensive attacks. In such cases the introduction of
products that are similar to the competitor's products are developed to liberate the
market share of the opposition's product line. When done properly this type of
strategy can avoid a full-scale frontal assault. The objective is to find niches in the
marketing space rather than the creating of products that directly compete against
the competition. It is more of an indirect assault on the oppositions market share.
Shayne Milligan suggests this strategy be used when the market is loosely
segmented, some segments are free of larger competitors, the attacker has strong
product development resources, the attacker has enough resources to operate in
multiple segments simultaneously and the attacker has a decentralized
organisational structure (Shayne Milligan. 2013).[14] E.g. Republic Health
Corporation, which is a chain of health care centres located in Dallas, developed an
advertising campaign called “Step Lively”. This was specifically incorporated to focus
on pricing, product form, sales promotion and advertising. The strategy was to create
incentives through discounted foot examinations and free home meals after
hospitalization as well as purchasing gift cards for a new shoe's. They focused on
one area at a time against competitors while funnelling specific treatments for
patients into one hospital in each area at a time (Naresh K, Malhotra. 1988).[15]
 Leapfrog strategy: Bypassing is a strategy that is the less indirect compared to the
alternative options. In business terms this can be achieved through technological
advancements or creating new segments that have not been developed as of
yet (Naresh K, Malhotra. 1988). [16]
 Guerilla: A guerrilla strategy usually consists of small incremental attacks by using
unconventional methods against a larger opposition. In a business context this can
be a strategy most commonly used by smaller firms on the bigger competition. These
 are tactically made forms of communications between the consumers influence of the
bigger competitors specifically targeting a market segment that is heavily influenced
by the competing opposition. They may be short burst attacks through price cuts,
supply deterrence, executive raids or a promotional blitz, even legal actions against
the competition or negative publicity. But this type of strategy must have some type
of disengage tactic, as a full on confrontational assault could be disastrous for a
small firm (Naresh K, Malhotra. 1988).[17] E.g. In 2005 a telecommunications
company based in Romania had launched its self in to and already emerging market
of mobile phones they did this by acquiring an already unsuccessful firm but re-
branding the company and using the already established networks. Two rivalry
competitors at that time had complete control of the telecommunications sector in
Romania. In order for the smaller firm to compete they had to resort to two marketing
warfare tactics. Flanking attacks as well as guerrilla strategies. They were able to
penetrate two segments, post pay and pre pay segments by not taking the
competition head on through more heavily operated segments of the industry at that
time they were able to find an area that was lease productive for the larger
telecommunication providers. The small firm was able to increase 95% of their
coverage to 82% of their networks distribution area making mobile phone more
affordable and assessable to their customer base initially targeting a young
audience. This was unexpected by the two larger telecommunications providers even
though they still controlled a larger portion of the telecom industry the small firm was
able to become a medium-sized competitor within a short period of time (B, G,
Cernat. G, L, Constantin. A, Chiciudean. 2008). [18]
Companies typically use many strategies concurrently, some defensive, some offensive, and
always some deterrent. According to the business literature of the period, offensive strategies
were more important than defensive one. Defensive strategies were used when needed, but an
offensive strategy was ra equisite. Only by offensive strategies, were market gains made. DAt
best, defensive strategies could aeep you from falling too far behind.
The marketing warfare literature also examined leadership and motivation, intelligence gathering,
types of marketing weapons, logistics, and communications.

References[edit]
1. ^ Picon, Marco (2015). Sun Tzu and the Art of Economic War. Grafeno Publishing
(published August 29, 2015).  ISBN  9789801282679.
2. ^ (Kotler, P. and Singh, R. (1981) "Marketing warfare in the 1980s", Journal of Business
Strategy, winter 1981, pp. 30-41
3. ^ (Quinn, J. (1980) Strategies for change|Strategies for change: Logical Incrementalism,
Irwin, Homewood Il
4. ^ (Goria, S. (2012) "How to adapt a tactical board wargame for marketing strategy
identification" [1], Journal of Intelligence Studies in Business (JISB), vol 2, n°3, 2012, pp.
12-27
5. ^ "AUT Library".  libsearch.aut.ac.nz. Retrieved  2016-04-01.[permanent dead link]
6. ^ "EzyInsights Blog - EzyInsights.com".  EzyInsights Blog. Archived from  the original  on
2016-03-20. Retrieved 2016-04-01.
7. ^ "AUT Library".  libsearch.aut.ac.nz. Retrieved  2016-04-01.[permanent dead link]