Challenges in positioning of service brands

Issues and challenges in thepositioning of service brands:a reviewCharles BlanksonResearch Assistant, School of Marketing, Kingston Business School,Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK

Stavros P. KalafatisReader in Marketing, School of Marketing, Kingston Business School,Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames, UK

Keywords Brands, Marketing theory, Positioning, Services marketing

Abstract In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to positioning and, morespecifically, positioning of service brands. This is so because of the unique characteristicsof services. Although some authors argue that there are no marked differences betweenpositioning in services and that of physical goods, the vast majority of marketing scholarsbelieve that it is difficult to embark on positioning strategies in services. Sheds some lighton this issue within the context and aims to contribute to the debate.

Introduction and aimIn retrospect, it is surprising to realise that after many years of scrupulous

debate, the issue of a dichotomy between services and physical goods still

remains. The growing acceptance that there are several overlaps between

services and physical goods (Levitt, 1981) has over the years prompted

concern about the issue of varying positioning strategies for services

(Rathmell, 1974; Arnott, 1992; Arnott and Easingwood, 1994). It is

important to know that although the concept of positioning is equally

pertinent to both physical goods and services (Cowell, 1989), the latter

possess characteristics such as intangibility, inseparability, perishability,

heterogeneity (Bateson, 1995) and non-standardization (Berry, 1983) which

make positioning of services more difficult and challenging than positioning

of physical goods (Ennew et al., 1993). This assertion is evidenced in the

work of Assael (1985) who states that:

... positioning a service is more difficult than positioning a product because of the

need to communicate vague and intangible benefits.

The above is supported by de Chernatony and Dall'Olmo Riley (1997) who

claim that service brands are particularly different, in that they rely on

employees' actions and attitudes. Given that employees' actions and

attitudes are stochastic, and that services characteristics are different from

those of physical goods (Bitner, 1997), it can be inferred that it is more

challenging to embark on positioning strategies in services. The foregoing is

evidenced in an earlier work by Lamb and Cravens (1990), who claimed that:

... services marketing differs from goods marketing because services pose different

marketing problems and opportunities from those faced by goods marketers...

The authors are grateful to two anonymous reviewers of the Journal of Product &Brand Management for their helpful comments. The first author thanks MarcosTsogas (Lecturer at Kingston Business School and PhD candidate at the Universityof Athens, Greece) and Dr Ogenyi Omar (Research Reader in Marketing at theLondon Institute) for the comments made on an earlier draft of this paper. He is alsoindebted to the School of Marketing, Kingston Business School for the support, bothfinancial and moral, in the course of his doctoral studies.

Service brands areparticularly different

106 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 8 NO. 2 1999, pp. 106-118, # MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1061-0421

An executive summary formanagers and executivereaders can be found at theend of this article

Although the issue of varying positioning in services has been opposed by

some writers (Wyckham et al., 1975; Buttle, 1986), other authors including

Shostack (1987) and Arnott and Easingwood (1994) believe that better

strategies can be followed if positioning decisions take into account issues

related to the complexity and variability of the service(s) on offer. This

growing debate has resulted in a seeming two-tier school of thought aimed at

providing explanation about the issue of adopting specific positioning

strategies in services. While the first school claims that positioning in

services need not be different from that of physical goods due to their

similarities with services (Cowell, 1989), the second school of thought

argues that since services are unique from physical goods in their

characteristics, they warrant a different approach in their positioning

strategies (Zeithaml, 1981). Taking the foregoing into account, it is

interesting to realise that so far, no work in the literature has examined the

seeming ongoing dichotomy of services and physical goods and their effects

on positioning. The basic aim of this paper is to present a review framework

that builds on researchers' concerns on the challenges facing marketers who

are embarking upon positioning strategies in services.

Two key issues (service and positioning) are therefore defined. We present a

short summary of the characteristics and an overview of the challenges that

these characteristics pose to positioning in services. We then highlight the

two schools of thought that are debating the issue of positioning in services.

We conclude by drawing attention to the key thrust of positioning in

services.

The concept of serviceThe American Marketing Association (AMA) put forward a definition of

service as: `̀ activities, benefits or satisfactions which are offered for sale, or

are provided in connection with the sale of goods'' (AMA, 1960). Later on, a

counter-definition was offered by Stanton, who claimed that: `̀ services are

those separately identifiable, essentially intangible activities which provide

want, satisfaction and are not necessarily tied to the sale of a product or

another service. To produce a service may or may not require the use of

tangible goods. However, when such use is required, there is no transfer of

title to these tangible goods'' (Stanton, 1981, cited in Cowell, 1989).

A contemporary definition provided by Kotler et al. (1996) states that: `̀ A

service is any activity or benefit that one party can offer to another which is

essentially intangible and does not result in the ownership of anything. Its

production may or may not be tied to a physical product''. In an earlier work

by Baker (1981), he claimed that while there appears to be a widespread

consensus about the nature of services, precise definitions may be difficult to

come by owing to the varied nature of the service industry. For full

appreciation of historical definitions and arguments on services in

chronological order, see Cowell (1989, p. 21). Apart from the underlying

differences with products inferred from the definition, marketing scholars

believe that the underlying differences provide the basis for varying

positioning strategies in services (Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996). Taking the

above definitions into account it can be inferred that service definitions in the

extant literature have incorporated contemporary dynamism of the

environment.

Characteristics of servicesServices have a number of distinctive characteristics which make them

different from physical goods, and subsequently affect their positioning

Two key issues

Definitions of service

JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 8 NO. 2 1999 107

strategies (Donnelly et al., 1985; Cowell, 1989; Arnott and Easingwood,

1994). These include:

(1) intangibility,

(2) inseparability,

(3) variability,

(4) perishability, and

(5) ownership.

To these characteristics, Berry (1980) has added:

(6) non-standardisation.

A summary of these characteristics and their implications for marketing and

positioning strategies is provided in Table I.

Referring to Table I, there is a degree of disagreement in the literature as to

whether some of the characteristics outlined, do, in fact, show the difference

between products and services. Wyckham et. al. (1975, quoted in Cowell,

1989), for instance, argue that especially the characteristics of intangibility,

heterogeneity and perishability are not themselves sufficiently discriminating.

The authors suggest a form of taxonomy that could be built upon the

differences of marketing of services and physical goods (see, also, Zeithaml

and Bitner, 1996).

Against this background, several writers, including Lovelock (1992), have

proposed a classification system based on how services are actually

Characteristics of

service Marketing implications

Positioning tactics and

strategies

Intangibility Sampling difficulty Focus on benefits and attributes

Strain on promotional

element of marketing mix

Increase tangibility of service

No patents possible Use brand names

Difficult to judge price and

quality in advance

Use personalities to personalise

service.

Develop reputation

Inseparability Requires presence of producer Learn to work in larger groups

Direct sale Work faster

Limited scale of operations Train more service providers

Heterogeneity Standard depends on who and

when provided

Careful personnel selection and

training

Difficult to assure quality Ensure standards are monitored

Pre-package service

Emphasise bespoke features

Perishability Cannot be stored

Problem with demand

fluctuations

Match supply and demand

effectively (e.g. reduce prices

during off-peak)

Ownership Customer has access to but

not ownership of service

activity or facility

Stress advantages of non-

ownership (e.g. permit easier

payment system)

Standardisation Difficulty in consistency of

service delivery

Create uniformity. Instil

company's ethos in personnel

Source: adapted from Cowell (1989) and Ellis and Mosher (1993)

Table I. Services characteristics and their implications for marketing and

positioning strategies

Summary of servicecharacteristics

108 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 8 NO. 2 1999

marketed. This view is evidenced in the author's earlier comment that:

`̀ ... if it can be shown that some services do share certain marketing-related

characteristics and classification, then the stage may be set for some useful

cross-fertilisation of concepts and strategies'' (Lovelock, 1983).

Furthermore, in the marketing of services, there is a growing increase in the

idea of `̀ tangibilising'' the service to facilitate positioning in service. This

issue is evidenced in Arnott's (1992) definition of positioning which

highlights the case for deliberately adjusting the features of the service or

product.

The issue of tangibilising the service to achieve effective positioning in

services is revealed in a case study research presented by Yost and Tucker

(1995), whose work on tangibilising a higher education service offering

noted that because higher education service offering presents all the

marketing challenges of the classic service delivery, Trinity University, a

private university in San Antonio, Texas, USA, attempts to tangibilise its

service by: `̀ ... touting the qualifications of its faculty, capitalising on its

strong liberal arts core curriculum, trumpeting the richness of its student-

faculty ratio, and stating that only faculty, not graduate students, teach at

Trinity University and on being a small university''.

The concept of positioningThere is a consensus in the literature that although conceptually, practically

and strategically positioning is a fundamental element of marketing strategy,

like service, there has been no single universally accepted definition of the

concept. This may, in part, be attributed to the absence of a clear theoretical

basis for positioning (Rigger, 1995) and the simplicity accorded to the

meaning of positioning. This state of affairs has given rise to several varying

terms associated with the concept, i.e. positioning, position, product

positioning, market positioning etc., but as stated by Arnott (1994), the

various terminologies are simply `̀ several sides of the same coin'' and

complement each other.

The varying positioning terms and perspectives show a pattern of three

underlying issues:

(1) conceptual,

(2) operational, and

(3) strategic.

It can consequently be asserted that the three underlying issues and the two

positioning perspectives:

(1) consumer; and

(2) managerial/organisational,

are encapsulated by the definition adopted for this paper and provided by

Arnott (1993). He claims that:

... positioning is the deliberate, proactive, iterative process of defining, measuring,

modifying and monitoring consumer perceptions of a marketable object ...

According to the author, the application of positioning involves certain

related activities, i.e. defining the dimensions of a particular perceptual space

that adequately represents the target audience's perception; measuring

objects' locations within that space and modifying actual characteristics of

the perceptions via a communications strategy. Put another way, the process

Positioning terms andperspectives

Related activities


of positioning can be described as iterative and requires deliberate and

proactive involvement of the marketer. Taking the author's definition into

account, it can be inferred that effective positioning strategies in either

services or physical goods may be achieved if the specific differentiating

characteristics are appreciated by the marketer.

It is, however, important to note that the lack of coherent definitions for

positioning (Crosier, 1981; Arnott, 1992, 1993, 1994) and the difficulties

involved in the implementation of the positioning process by practitioners

(de Chernatony, 1994) has invariably given rise to comments about the lack

of appreciation of the positioning concept (Pollay, 1985). Such predicament

was first expressed in the writings of Aaker and Shansby (1982) who stated

that: `̀ positioning means different things to different people'', and in the

main their comments remain true today. According to Rigger (1995), the

absence of a rigorous definition is inhibiting both practitioner and academic

scholars in developing appropriate means of measuring the

operationalisation of positioning. In addition, owing to the confusion

surrounding the term `̀ services'' (Buttle, 1986), marketers who are

embarking on positioning strategies in services are confronted with unique

challenges (Easingwood and Mahajan, 1989). It is important to note that

concern has been raised about the extent to which marketers actually embark

on comprehensive analysis of data to help in their positioning strategies

(Piercy, 1991; quoted in de Chernatony, 1994).

The interface between services/physical goods and positioningIn recent years, there has been concern regarding the difficulty encountered

in the positioning of services. GroÈnroos (1990), for example, writes that

managing services is, to a large extent, different from the traditional

management of manufactured goods. In fact, apart from a few authors who

have written to the contrary (see, for example, Wyckham et al., 1975; Buttle,

1986), several authors have taken the view that although the concept of

positioning is equally pertinent to both goods and services, due to the latter's

differentiating characteristics, positioning of services is more difficult than

positioning of physical goods (Cravens and Lamb, 1989; Bateson, 1995). It is

also believed that better strategies can be followed if positioning decisions

take into account issues related to the complexity and variability of the

service(s) on offer (Shostack, 1987; Gabbott and Hogg, 1994).

At the same time, there is a growing acceptance of the fact that there are

several overlaps between services and goods (Levitt, 1981), which has

prompted concern about the bases of the argument for varying positioning

strategies for services discussed earlier. For instance, as was noted by

Middleton (1983), the whole debate about the characteristics of goods and

services is a question of semantics and rather confusing for practitioners and

students alike. The above discussion leaves one to conclude that there seems

to be a two-tier school of thought arguing for and against variations in

services positioning.

The first school of thought: those who argue against varying positioningstrategies in servicesLevitt's (1981) paper, `̀ Marketing intangible products and product

intangibles'', argues strongly for marketers and marketing researchers to

refrain from concentrating all their efforts on the differences between

services and goods. Although the author accepts that there are special

difficulties facing sellers of intangibles in retaining customers, he insists that

Lack of coherent definitions

Overlaps between servicesand goods


the ongoing process of distinguishing between companies based on whether

they market services or goods has only limited utility, adding that:

all products, whether they are services or goods possess a certain amount of

intangibility ... services like insurance and transportation, of course, are nearly

entirely intangible ... and even goods, while they can be seen, often cannot be tried

out before they are bought (Levitt, 1981).

According to Levitt, one useful way of halting such arguments is to refer to

services and goods as `̀ intangibles'' and `̀ tangibles''. This way, he asserts,

will encompass all types of companies which, in one way or the other, sell

intangibles. As was put by the author, `̀ everybody sells intangibles in the

marketplace, no matter what is produced in the factory'' (Levitt, 1981).

Cowell (1989, p.115), in support of Levitt, questions the relevance of

creating distinct dichotomies in the marketing of goods and services and

asserts that customers derive benefits and satisfactions from service products

in the same way that they will for physical goods. Cowell's writings examine

the relationships and relevance of some of the concepts conventionally used

in the product planning and development context of the tangible product with

that of intangible products. Supporting the first school of thought that there

are after all, no marked differences between physical goods and services, and

therefore positioning strategies need not be different for services marketing,

Cowell notes that, for example, the decisions underpinning the development

of the service product are the same as those for that of physical products,

adding that:

... service product strategies are no less important to service marketing

organisations than they are to organisations marketing goods, ... characteristics of

intangibility and people orientation do not invalidate the relevance of product

planning and development to service settings.

The second school of thought: those who argue for services-relatedpositioning strategiesIn spite of the fact that several writers have noted the similarity between

physical goods and services, this is refuted by some scholars including

Zeithaml (1981), who supports services' unique characteristics and therefore

claims that services necessitate different positioning strategies and tactics

from those used when assessing goods. The author draws on a framework

based on search, experience and credence qualities. The search qualities are

attributes that consumers can determine prior to purchasing a product. These

include attributes such as colour, style, price, fit, feel, hardness, smell, etc.

These are, unlike services, pertinent to physical goods such as clothing,

furniture and jewellery, which can usually be determined and evaluated prior

to purchase.

The experience qualities, however, are attributes which can only be realised

after purchase or during consumption and include characteristics such as

taste, wearability and purchase satisfaction. While the experience qualities

may be pertinent to physical goods, they are more so related to services. For

example, certain services including package holidays, restaurant meals,

medical treatment are high in experience qualities. This is because their

attributes cannot be known or assessed until they have been purchased and

consumed. The third category of qualities of goods, i.e. credence qualities,

portray characteristics which the consumer may find difficulties in

evaluating even after purchase and consumption. These are services and

include open heart operation, appendix operation etc. This is taken up by

Davies (1996), who cites the search, experience and credence qualities

Everybody sells intangibles

Experience qualities onlyrealised after purchase


framework to overcome the problems affecting the evaluation of services

prior to, during and after purchase (see Table II).

Taking the foregoing into account, it can be inferred that with regard to

services positioning, marketers must take into account services' generic

differences, which are capable of influencing consumers' perceptions and

choice (for full appreciation of the search, experience and credence qualities

model and their implication for services marketing and positioning

strategies, see Zeithaml's (1981) and Davies' (1996) work).

In support of the second school of thought, Zeithaml and Bitner (1996) write

that interpretation of services poses difficulties to marketers who are

embarking on positioning in services. The authors cite the examples of

oversimplification, incompleteness and subjectivity as posing problems in

the interpretation of services. The authors suggest that services can be

positioned on a variety of dimensions including:

(1) needs they satisfy,

(2) benefits they deliver,

Information

quality Search Experience Credence

Problems Intangibility

Complexity

Joint consumption

with production

Intangibility and deferred

benefits

Uncertainty of Heterogeneity Heterogeneity

performance Perishability

Global

objectives

Make evaluation easier, lower perceived risk, develop/restore trust

Objectives Extend search

qualities

Encourage consumer

independence from

service provider

Manage service

encounter

Reduce credence

qualities

Manage service

encounter

Positioning Offer tangible cues: Offer user-friendly Reinforce claims through

strategies positioning using advice: consistent positioning

relevant criteria Use cognitive scripts using:

through: guiding expectations Physical environment

performance, Simplify charges and corporate livery

reliability, Offer support Encourage serving same

innovativeness, materials, e.g. customers

expertise. videos Develop relationships

Present appropriate Maintain consistent through:

position message Responsiveness

Raise salience of Ensure service is easy Offer integrated

criteria to use services

Offer `̀ reason why'' Focus on key Anticipate changes,

a criterion is best customers, demarket offer flexibility in

Match intensity of others services

message to

competitive standing Boost morale to retain staff and improve

performance using internal marketing and

suitable remuneration schemes

Ensure ready access to information: point of sale,

personal advisers, hotlines. Training in

interpersonal skills

Source: adapted from Davis (1996, p. 66)

Table II. Problems and possible positioning strategies for dealing with services

Interpretation of services


(3) specific service features,

(4) time of use, and

(5) who uses it.

Other supporters of the second school of thought are Parasuraman et al.

(1994b), whose research on `̀ alternative scales for SERVQUAL'' led them

to conclude that services are differently perceived by consumers, thuscreating unclear, ambiguous and confusing meanings to different people. The

implication for such a confused state of mind in consumers, the authors

assert, should be the basis for adopting different positioning strategies forservices as opposed to physical goods. Furthermore, with regard to the

implication of quality and the issue of positioning, Parasuraman et al. (1988,

p.13) claim that: `̀ Unlike goods quality, which can be measured objectivelyby such indicators as durability and number of defects (see, also, Crosby,

1979), service quality is an abstract and elusive construct because of

services' unique characteristics (see, also, Parasuraman et al., 1985).

It is important to note that this assertion has been noted in an earlier work by

Berry (1980), who writes that: `̀ Services differ from goods in some veryimportant ways, and these differences present special challenges to

positioning''. The author further states that:

Services are relatively intangible, produced and consumed simultaneously, and

often less standardised than goods. These unique characteristics of services will

therefore present special challenges for services positioning (see, also, George and

Berry, 1981) .

Furthermore, in support of the second school of thought, Cutler and Javalgi's(1993) research reveals that service advertisements often contain more

emotional appeals than do product advertisements. They also found out that

service advertisements, more often, contain more emotional headlines thando product advertisements, although, according to the authors, their test did

not show any significance where quality appeal, convenience appeal and

portrayal of service employees in advertisements were concerned. Theauthors' research shows that in order to effect lasting positioning strategies,

there was a high proportion of advertisements which use emotion to improve

the tangibility of services. Other methods used to increase tangibility ofservices were personalised headlines and the symbolic representation of the

service.

Cutler and Javalgi (1993) further cite the example of Delta Air Lines who

found out that services' inherent differences, coupled with their ambiguity,

demand a different approach in their positioning strategies. In support, Ellisand Mosher (1993) claim that: `̀ Professional service firms are faced with

considerations that are unique compared to product marketers''. The authors'

research involved some 109 certified public accountants firms (CPA) in thestate of Kentucky, USA. To cope with the issue of positioning in services,

the authors recommend the framework, `̀ complete positioning strategy for

services'' (see Figure 1), which may be adapted by marketers involved in thepositioning of services. The framework provides the means for manipulating

each of the four key characteristics of services through the application of

specific marketing tactics.

ConclusionIt can be concluded that the inherent characteristics of services, which have

often been seen as largely theoretical, may be conscious signals for

recognising the differences between service brands marketing and the

Special challenges

A different approach


positioning concept (Ellis and Mosher, 1993). Notwithstanding, the extant

literature has shown that even for the widely accepted tangible product, thereis some form of service attached to it. In essence, the degree of service in any

product, and vice versa, should be construed as raising challenges for

marketers (Bitner, 1997; Tovey, 1997) trying to apply the positioningconcept.

Taking the foregoing discussion into account, we suggest that in terms of

positioning either a service (a product with a high degree of service attached

to it), or product (one with a low degree of service attached to it), thediversity of service industries warrants special appreciation and concern

(Dibb and Simkin, 1993). There is therefore the need for an ongoing

dialogue between the two schools of thought. Moreover, we are not seekingto prove a case for particular studies, only that there is a general area of

concern for marketers embarking on positioning of their service brands. This

paper is therefore not a criticism of past work, for which more rigorousresearch would be needed, but an indication of where attention to details

about positioning in services is needed (see Schwartz and Murphy, 1997). As

was put by Fisher (1991), `̀ ... service marketers must have a goodunderstanding of their special competitive situation to achieve long-term

competitive advantage ...''.

References

Aaker, D. and Shansby, J. (1982), `̀ Positioning your product'', Business Horizons, Vol. 25,

May-June, pp. 56-62.

American Marketing Association (1960), Definition of Service, American Marketing

Association, Chicago, IL.

Arnott, D.C. (1992), `̀ Bases of financial services positioning in the personal pension, life

assurance and personal equity plan sectors'', PhD thesis, Manchester Business School,

University of Manchester.

Arnott, D.C. (1993), `̀ Positioning: redefining the concept'', Warwick Business School

Research Papers, No. 8, p. 24.

Arnott, D.C. (1994), `̀ Positioning: on defining the concept'', Proceedings Marketing

Educators Group (MEG) Conference, University of Ulster, Coleraine, 4-6 July.

Arnott, D.C. and Easingwood, C.J. (1994), `̀ Positioning in services: an hypothetical typology

of competitive bases'', Proceedings, 23rd EMAC Conference, Vol. 1, 17-20 May,

University of Limburg, Maastricht, pp. 1-3.

Intangibility Inseparability

Heterogeneity Perishability

placeprice

productpromotionpresentation

place

priceproductpromotion

productpresentation

People

Source: Ellis and Mosher (1993, p. 133).

Figure 1. Positioning in the services environment

Diversity of serviceindustries


Assael, H. (1985), Marketing Management, Kent Publishing, Belmont, CA.

Baker, M.J. (1981), `̀ Services-salvation or servitude?'', The Quarterly Review of Marketing,

Spring, pp. 7-18.

Bateson, J. (1995), Managing Services Marketing (3rd ed.), The Dryden Press, London.

Berry, L.L. (1980), `̀ Services ± marketing is different'', Business, Vol. 30 No. 3, May-June,

pp. 24-9.

Berry, L.L. (1983), `̀ Relationship marketing'', in Berry, L.L., Shostack, G.L. and Upah, G.D.

(Eds), Emerging Perspectives of Services Marketing, American Marketing Association,

Chicago, IL, pp. 25-8.

Bitner, M.J. (1997), `̀ Services marketing: perspectives on service excellence'', Journal of

Retailing, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 3-6.

Buttle, F. (1986), `̀ Unserviceable concepts in service marketing'', The Quarterly Review of

Marketing, Spring, pp. 8-14.

de Chernatony, L. (1994), `̀ Developing a more effective brand positioning'', The Journal of

Brand Management, Vol. 1 No. 6, pp. 373-9.

de Chernatony, L. and Dall'Olmo Riley, F. (1997), `̀ The chasm between managers' and

consumers' views of brands: the experts' perspectives'', Journal of Strategic Marketing,

Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 89-104.

Cowell, D. (1989), The Marketing of Services, Heinemann, London.

Cravens, D.W. and Lamb, C. (1989), `̀ Services marketing ± who's the customer and what's the

competition?'', Business (AEC), Vol. 39, October-December, pp. 3-10.

Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality is Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Crosier, K. (1981), `̀ Ladders in the mind'', Occasional Reports Series, No. 2, University of

Strathclyde Department of Marketing, Glasgow.

Cutler, B.D. and Javalgi, R.G. (1993), `̀ Analysis of print advertisement features: services

versus products'', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 33 No. 2, March/April, pp. 62-9.

Davies, M. (1996), `̀ Image problems with financial services: some considerations for

improvement'', Management Decision, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 64-71.

Dibb, S. and Simkin, L. (1993), `̀ The strength of branding and positioning in services'',

International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 4, pp. 25-35.

Donnelly, J.H., Berry, L.L. and Thompson, T.W. (1985), Marketing Financial Services, Irwin

Professional Publishing, Burr Bridge, IL.

Easingwood, C. and Mahajan (1989), `̀ Positioning of financial services for competitive

strategy'', Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 6, September, pp. 207-19.

Ellis, B. and Mosher, J. (1993), `̀ Six Ps for four characteristics: a complete positioning strategy

for the professional services firm ± CPAs'', Journal of Professional Services Marketing,

Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 129-45.

Ennew, C., Watkins, T. and Wright, M. (1993), Cases in Marketing Financial Services,

Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

Fisher, R.J. (1991), `̀ Durable differentiation strategies for services'', The Journal of Services

Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 1, Winter, pp. 19-28.

Gabbott, M. and Hogg, G. (1994), `̀ Consumer behaviour and services: a review'', Journal of

Marketing Management, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 311-24.

George, W.R. and Berry, L.L. (1981), `̀ Guidelines for the advertising of services'', Business

Horizons, Vol. 24, pp. 52-6.

GroÈnroos, C. (1990), Services Management and Marketing, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.

Hooley, G.J. and Saunders, J. (1993), Competitive Positioning: The Key to Market Success,

Prentice-Hall, Hemel Hempstead.

Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. and Wong, V. (1996), Principles of Marketing: The

European Edition, Prentice-Hall International, Hemel Hempstead, p. 588.

Lamb, C.W. and Cravens, D.W. (1990), `̀ Services marketing ± reaching the customer and

creating satisfaction'', Business, January-March, pp. 13-19.

Levitt, T. (1981), `̀ Marketing intangible products and product intangibles'', Harvard Business

Review, May-June.

Lovelock, C.H. (1983), `̀ Classifying services to gain strategic marketing insights'', Journal of

Marketing, Summer.


Lovelock, C.H. (1992), `̀ Classifying services to gain strategic marketing insights'', in Bateson,

J. (Ed.), Managing Services Marketing, The Dryden Press, Orlando, FL.

Middleton, V.T.C. (1983), `̀ Product marketing ± goods and services compared'', The

Quarterly Review of Marketing, Summer, pp. 1-10.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1985), `̀ A conceptual model of service quality

and its implication for further research'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1988), `̀ SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale

for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality'', Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64

No. 1, pp. 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1994), `̀ Alternative scales for measuring

service quality: a comparative assessment based on psychometric and diagnostic criteria'',

Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 201-30.

Piercy, N. (1991), Market-led Strategic Change, Thorsons, London.

Pollay, R.W. (1985), `̀ The subsidising sizzle: a descriptive history of print advertising,

1900-1980'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50, October, pp. 135-45.

Rathmell, J.R. (1974), Marketing in the Service Sector, Winthrop Publishers Inc., Cambridge,

MA.

Rigger, W. (1995), `̀ Positioning in theory and practice: towards a research agenda'', 24th

EMAC Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1, 16-19 May, ESSEC, France, pp. 991-1009.

Schwartz, K. and Murphy, I.P. (1997), `̀ Airline Food is no joke: marketers improve menus to

please passengers'', Marketing News, Vol. 31 No. 21, 13 October, pp. 1 and 10.

Shostack, G.L. (1987), `̀ Service positioning through structural change'', Journal of Marketing,

January.

Stanton, W.J. (1981), Fundamentals of Marketing, 6th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Tovey, R. (1997), `̀ Employees weigh in on ad campaigns'', Insights from MSI (Marketing

Science Institute), Winter/Spring, pp. 3-4.

Wyckham, R. G., Fitzroy, T. and Mandry, G.D. (1975), `̀ Marketing of services: an evaluation

of the theory'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 59-67.

Yost, M. and Tucker, S. (1995), `̀ Tangible evidence in marketing a service: the value of a

campus visit in choosing a college'', Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,

Vol. 6 No. 1.

Zeithaml, V.A. (1981), `̀ How consumer evaluation processes differ between goods and

services'', in Donnelly, J.H. and George (Eds), Marketing of Services, American

Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.

Zeithaml, V.A. and Bitner, M.J. (1996), Services Marketing, The McGraw-Hill Companies

Inc., New York, NY.

&


Documents

Challenges in positioning of service brands