the role of e-commerce in multi- channel marketing strategy 406 e-retailing/handbook... · system....

The Role of e-Commerce in Multi-Channel Marketing Strategy

James R. Brown and Rajiv P. Dant

Abstract This chapter describes the key aspects of managing multiple marketingchannel systems and explains how e-commerce plays a key role in their successfuloperation. We adopt a customer-centric perspective by beginning with a discussionof channel service outputs—those benefits that customers hope to obtain from themarketing channel. Successful firms recognize that customers are not homoge-neous in their desire for channel service outputs and, hence, can be grouped intomarket segments that are best served by different marketing channels. We enu-merate the advantages of multiple channel systems and describe some of theirlimitations, in particular, potential conflict among the various channels and onechannel’s cannibalization of another’s demand. The effective integration of thefirm’s diverse marketing channels can overcome these problems and, simulta-neously, generate superior multi-channel performance. Finally, we recommendedthat channel decision-makers be cognizant of and accommodate the demandenvironment that confronts the firm’s multiple marketing channels. Specifically,the complexities and the differential effects of the buying and selling stages and thechannel life cycle stages cannot be ignored in designing a successful multi-channelsystem.

Keywords Multi-channel marketing � e-commerce � Market segmentation �Channel conflict � Cannibalization � Channel performance � Buying and sellingstages � Channel life cycle

J. R. Brown (&)Kmart Corporation Chair in Marketing, West Virginia University, Morgantown, USAe-mail: [email protected]

R. P. DantProfessor of Marketing, University of Oklahoma, Norman, USAe-mail: [email protected]

R. P. DantGriffith University, Gold Coast, Australia

F. J. Martínez-López (ed.), Handbook of Strategic e-Business Management,Progress in IS, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-39747-9_20,� Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

467

1 Introduction

Recent figures show that e-commerce in the U.S. is nearing the $200 billionrevenue mark and amounts to roughly 9 % of total retail sales (Rigby 2011).Projections are that e-commerce will eventually account for about 15–20 % oftotal retail sales (Rigby 2011, p. 66). In the apparel sector, for example, theestimated 18.2 % average annual growth in e-commerce revenue has far outpacedthe roughly 0.2 % average annual revenue gain generated by brick-and-mortaroutlets (Panteva and Stampfli 2012). According to a recent article in MultichannelMerchant (T.P. 2011), e-commerce experienced a sales increase of 17.6 % in 2011over 2010, with the apparel, children’s clothing, and footwear lines of tradeaccounting for most of this increase. Thus while e-commerce may not haveattained the lofty position forecasted in the late-1990s, it has still become a for-midable force with which bricks-and-mortar retailers must reckon. And, manytraditional retailers have done just that by adding an internet presence to theirchannel portfolios.

Using multiple pathways to reach their target market customers is nothing new;firms have done so for decades (Moriarity and Moran 1990; Preston and Schramm1965; Weigand 1977). For example, Snap-On Tools utilizes franchised distributorswho serve smaller customers (e.g., car dealerships, small industrial fabricators,independent professional mechanics) from their truck-mounted warehouses, whilethey employ a company sales force to call upon large industrial customers whomay need specialized tools or diagnostic equipment. The advent of e-commercehas made available another, high profile pathway to reach target markets. As aresult, e-commerce has brought additional attention to the concept of multiplemarketing channels (Neslin and Shankar 2009).

The purpose of this chapter is to examine key aspects of managing multiplemarketing channel systems and how e-commerce plays a key role in their suc-cessful operation. The chapter is organized according to Fig. 1. We begin with adiscussion of channel service outputs—those benefits that customers hope toobtain from the marketing channel. Customers are not homogeneous in their desirefor channel service outputs and, hence, can be grouped into market segments thatare best served by different marketing channels. The extent to which the operationof those multiple channels is synchronized refers to multi-channel integration.Managing conflict among the various channels and minimizing one channel’scannibalization of another’s demand are key outcomes of multi-channel integra-tion. Effective multi-channel integration with limited cannibalization is expectedto generate superior multi-channel performance. All of this takes place within thedemand environment that faces the firm’s marketing channels.

Before discussing the major elements of Fig. 1, we define what we mean by‘‘marketing channels’’ and ‘‘multiple marketing channels.’’ We then highlightsome of the advantages and disadvantages of using multi-channels.

Marketing channels are defined ‘‘as a set of interdependent organizationsinvolved in the process of making a product or service available for use or

468 J. R. Brown and R. P. Dant

consumption’’ by organizational customers or household buyers (Stern et al. 1989,p. 5, emphasis deleted). They ‘‘… typically include the store, the Web, sales force,third party agency, call center, and the like’’ (Neslin and Shankar 2009, p. 70).Multiple marketing channels occur ‘‘… when a firm makes a product [simulta-neously] available to the market through two or more channels of distribution’’(Coelho et al. 2003, p. 23). For example, some firms, such as the U.S.-basedoutdoor outfitter L.L. Bean, use multiple types of retail outlets to reach their targetmarkets, including retail stores, catalogs, websites (Wallace et al. 2004). Others,such as the Highland Mint—a U.S. marketer of sports memorabilia—utilizes itsown e-commerce channels as well as television shopping networks.

Firms use multiple marketing channels for a variety of reasons. Some of theirmore prominent advantages are detailed in the following section.

1.1 Advantages of Multiple Channel Systems

One reason why firms use multiple marketing channels is that they provide mar-keters with lower cost access to new markets (Zhang et al. 2010). Electronicchannels are routinely more profitable than their bricks-and-mortar counterparts; forexample, ‘‘online-only [clothing] retailers earn 6.8 % in pre-tax profit, whereasbrick-and-mortar stores earn 5 %’’ (Panteva and Stampfli 2012). Part of the reasonis that e-commerce operates with lower overhead. Lower real estate costs and higherlabor productivity are just two of the ways in which internet channels are less costly.Further, ‘‘…adding non-store channels (e.g. Internet, catalogs, mobile phones)enables retailers with limited locations to exploit economies of scope by expandingtheir markets without building additional stores’’ (Zhang et al. 2010, p. 169).

Fig. 1 Managing a multi-channel marketing system

The Role of e-Commerce in Multi-Channel Marketing Strategy 469

Second, using multiple channels enable firms to generate increased customersatisfaction and loyalty (Wallace et al. 2004; Zhang et al. 2010). For example, byadding multiple channels, a marketer expands the ways in which it can createadditional value for its customers (Wallace et al. 2004). For instance, e-commercechannels provide time-strapped customers with a convenient location (their ownhomes), convenient times (24 h a day, seven days a week), and ready access toproduct information (Shankar et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2010). These benefitsexpand the ease with which customers can shop for the marketer’s products,purchase those products, and obtain post-sale support for them.

Third, a firm can create a strategic advantage by using multiple pathways toreach its target customers (Zhang et al. 2010). Multiple channels provide firmswith a better understanding as how to satisfy their customers’ needs and wants, aswell as how to deliver customers a seamless experience through their multiplechannels (Zhang et al. 2010). Successful multi-channel firms create a strategicadvantage through their distribution efficiency, assortments of complementary andunique merchandise, and the presentation of product information, as well as thecollection and utilization of customer information (Alba et al. 1997). To the extentthat the firm can leverage this knowledge and expertise derived from operatingmultiple marketing channels, it can create a strong, strategic advantage over itscompetitors.

1.2 Disadvantages of Multiple Channel Systems

In spite of its many advantages (for a fuller listing, see Coelho and Easingwood2004), a multi-channel system for reaching the marketplace has a number ofdrawbacks. First, multiple channels can create customer resentment and confusion(Coelho and Easingwood 2004) especially, for example, if customers face higherprices in one channel as opposed to another. Further, different channels providedifferent levels of service (Coelho and Easingwood 2004). For example, a largesegment of the market still prefers to shop for clothing and accessories at bricks-and-mortar stores because they can see and try on products (Panteva and Stampfli2012). For these customers e-commerce can be frustrating because sizes and colorsare frequently not as depicted.

Second, if the firm charges wholesale prices to its traditional resellers that resultin higher retail prices than those charged on the internet, conflict between the firmand its resellers can ensue. It can also occur if e-commerce channels capture asignificant amount of the traditional resellers’ market demand.

A third disadvantage of multiple channel systems is that their cost advantagesmay not materialize, or take too long to accrue (Coelho and Easingwood 2004).These costs involve additional investment in facilities and equipment (e.g., ful-fillment warehouses and materials handling equipment for e-commerce), humanresources (e.g., call center employees and their training), and product adaptation(e.g., different product models or lines) for multiple channels. In addition, shipping


delays and lost-in-transit shipments undercut the promise of convenient shopping,ordering, and payment for e-commerce channels; further, the cost of shipping canamount to about 25 % of sales revenue (Panteva and Stampfli 2012).

2 Managing Multiple Marketing Channels

In spite of their disadvantages, many firms find that the advantages of operatingmultiple marketing channels outweigh their drawbacks. The effective managementof a multi-channel marketing system involves several steps (Fig. 1). These stepsinclude understanding: (1) what customers want from the channel (i.e., channelservice outputs), (2) how the heterogeneity of their desires results in marketsegments, (3) how integrating the operations of multiple channels can minimizechannel conflict and limit cannibalization of demand, (4) the impact of multi-channel integration, managing channel conflict, and limiting cannibalization onmulti-channel performance, and (5) the role of the channel demand environment(e.g., stages of the buying and selling processes) in affecting the management ofmultiple marketing channels.

2.1 Channel Service Outputs

Marketing channels create value for their customers by providing them with theirdesired products and services. The channel service outputs include locationalconvenience, temporal convenience, depth and breadth of assortment, desiredproduct quantity, and support services such as product information, provision ofcredit, and after-sales service (Stern and Sturdivant 1987). New technologiesincluding electronic commerce have enabled these service outputs to be unbun-dled, especially the provision of product information and the execution of trans-actions (cf. Neslin and Shankar 2009; Schoenbachler and Gordon 2002; VanBruggen et al. 2010).

As a result, multi-channel marketing makes ‘‘… more service outputs availableacross several channels, [therefore] final customers have an opportunity to engagewith a retailer over multiple contact points; this can occur during a single purchaseor over multiple purchases’’ (Wallace et al. 2004, p. 250). This also means thatdifferent marketing channels can specialize in the provision of different channelservice outputs.

For example, e-commerce channels for Ford automobiles provide valuableproduct information that allows customers to learn about Ford’s car models andtheir attributes, design their own automobiles, connect with other Ford enthusiasts,and locate nearby Ford dealers. However, the customer can only purchase a newFord automobile through an authorized Ford dealer. Hence, Ford’s electronicchannel supplements its dealer channel by providing its customers with convenient


access to product information (cf. Finlay 2011). For customers who prefer tominimize their contact with the dealer’s sales force, the information channel issomewhat decoupled from the transaction channel (i.e., the dealer channel).

As the Ford example shows, e-commerce has given customers more controlover their points of contact with the marketer (Wallace et al. 2004). In a sense,customers are able to mix and match a firm’s multiple channels by repackaging thechannel’s service outputs to maximize the value they receive (cf. Rigby 2011).

Figure 2 illustrates this point. For example, a consumer shopping for a newrefrigerator may utilize on-line channels to gather information about productfeatures and how well various brands stack up on those features. She may opt tobuy the refrigerator from a local retail store who can provide immediate deliveryand installation as well as haul away and dispose of her old ‘‘fridge.’’ Anotherconsumer may gather product and feature information at various ‘‘brick andmortar’’ retailers and then opt to buy from a ‘‘cash and carry’’ retailer where hearranges for his own delivery, installation, and old product disposal. Of course, heexpects to pay a lower price because he undertakes more of the channel serviceoutputs for himself.

As these examples illustrate, customers vary in their desire for channel serviceoutputs. This reinforces an important reason as to why firms use multiple chan-nels—different channels are needed to reach different market segments.

2.2 Understanding Customer Segments

A key axiom of contemporary marketing thought is that markets are comprised ofcustomers who vary in their needs and wants. The challenge for the marketer thenis to divide the market into groups of customers that are homogeneous within eachgroup in terms of their needs and wants, but are maximally different from othergroups. This process of dividing the market is termed market segmentation(Raulerson et al. 2009). The next step is for firms to identify those market seg-ments that present the greatest potential for sales, profits, and future growth. Firms

CustomerBenefit

Who Provides Channel Service Outputs?*

Locations for Ordering Distant NearbyTemporal Convenience 9-5 M-F; 9-Noon Sat 24/7 Delivery Time Delayed ImmediateAssortment Creation Multi-Stop Shopping One-Stop Shopping Payment Convenience Cash Only Cash/Check/Credit Delivery Cash & Carry Delivery ProvidedInstallation Not Available Turn Key ServiceTechnical Support Not Available Available Where

Needed

EC, E

R

RC

E

R

RECC

R, E, C

EC R

C, ER

R C, E

Fig. 2 Locus of functional performance in multiple marketing channels (Adapted from Albaet al. 1997, Table 1) (*) E: e-commerce channel; R retail store; C catalog store


will then direct the lion’s share of their marketing resources to developing andexploiting these target market segments.

Because advertising media use easily measurable characteristics (e.g., gender,household size, household income) to describe their audiences, marketingresearchers attempt to identify target market segments by these same character-istics. They also attempt to identify target market segments according to cus-tomers’ previous behaviors. A number of academic studies have attempted toidentify the characteristics of market segments in terms of their multi-channelbehavior. Several of these studies are summarized in Fig. 3.

Some of these studies have attempted to describe multi-channel shoppers,customers who patronize all of the firm’s channels to develop his/her portfolio of

Sample Segments IdentifiedSample Size Segment A Segment B Segment C Segment D

Keen et al. (2004) Chicago, U.S.A. 290 mall shoppers Generalists• Roughly equal

importance of all attributes

• Preference for retail format

• Price• Control over purchase• Ease of use • Subjective norms• Previous experience

buying through format

Formatters• Preference for retail

stores• Price

Price Sensitives• Price-driven• Format preference• Previous experience

with format

Experiencers• Positive previous

experience purchasing through the format

• Format preference• Price

Kumar andVenkatesan (2005)

Multinational • 3758 customers in Sample 1

• 3721 customers in Sample 2

• 3200 customers in validation sample

Multi-Channel Shopper• Customer tenure• Purchase frequency• Customer-initiated

contacts• Cross-buying• Product returns• Customer-initiated

web-based contacts

Thomas andSullivan (2005)

U.S.A. 4162 first time customers of a major retailer

Remote Channel Immigrants

• Distance from closest store

• First purchase is from catalog

Bricks-and-Mortar Shoppers

• Channel loyal to bricks-and-mortar store

• First purchase is from brick

McGoldrick andCollins (2007)

U.K. 780 consumers Stores-Prone• Older• Work more hours• Further from shops• Less computer

experience• Less weekly internet

usage

Catalog-Prone• Older• Work fewer hours• Closer to shops • Least computer

experience • Least weekly internet

usage

Internet-Prone• Younger• Work more hours• Furthest from shops• Most computer

experience • Most weekly internet

usage

Multi-Channel• Younger• Work more hours• Further from shops• Less computer

experience • Less internet usage

Konu et al. (2008) The Netherlands 364 consumers Uninvolved Shoppers• Low attitudes toward

all channels for all transaction phases low loyalty

• Low shopping enjoyment

• Lower price consciousness

• Slightly high innovativeness

Multi-Channel Enthusiasts• High innovativeness• High shopping

enjoyment• Low loyalty• Consumers who tend

to use the internet and catalogs for both information search and purchase

Store-Focused Consumers• High loyalty• Somewhat higher

shopping enjoyment• Low innovativeness• Greater tendency to

use the store for both search and purchase.

Pauwels et al. (2011)

The Netherlands 6594 customers of a retail chain

Smart Fans• Showed the highest

response to web site introduction

• Show the highest response to online and offline price promotions and competitive actions

• Search the largest number of topics of interest on the web

• Consult more online pages on price-oriented‘special actions’ than customers in the other segments

• Have more higher education

• Have more kids• Are more likely to be

male

Fun Loving Locals• Reduced purchase

volume ( ) after website introduction

• Consult more online pages on games and sending e-cards than other customers do

• Live closer to a store• Earned less higher

education• Have fewer kids than

customers in the other segments

Fashionables• Not very price

sensitive• Focus on accessing

pages on broader themes such as fashion, gift giving, and ‘especially for you’ items

• Spend more money per product after website introduction

Fig. 3 Market segments identified by selective studies on multi-channel customer behavior


marketing channel services. Typical multi-channel shoppers can be described bybehavioral characteristics such as their longevity as customers, how frequentlythey purchase, the number of contacts they initiate with the firm, the number ofproduct categories they buy from the firm, and the number of products they havereturned over their lifetimes as customers (Kumar and Venkatesan 2005). Theyalso tend to use both online (i.e., e-commerce) and offline (e.g., catalog) channelsboth for information search and purchase (Konus� et al. 2008). Multi-channelshoppers can also be defined by demographic characteristics. They are younger,work more hours, live further from stores, have less experience using the com-puter, and are not connected to the internet as much (McGoldrick and Collins2007). Psychographic characteristics also describe multi-channel shoppers asbeing highly innovative and enjoying shopping (Konus� et al. 2008).

Bricks-and-mortar shoppers tend to be older, work more hours, live furtherfrom stores, have less computer experience, and use the internet less often(McGoldrick and Collins 2007). In addition to these demographic characteristics,store shoppers are not as innovative, but derive somewhat more enjoyment fromshopping (Konus� et al. 2008). They are also price-oriented and like to have morecontrol over their purchases (Keen et al. 2004). Bricks-and-mortar shoppers arechannel loyal (Keen et al. 2004; Konus� et al. 2008; Thomas and Sullivan 2005)and use stores for both information search and purchase (Konus� et al. 2008).

Internet shoppers live farthest from the closest stores (McGoldrick and Collins2007; Thomas and Sullivan 2005). They are also younger, work more hours, havethe most computer experience, and are online more hours per week (McGoldrickand Collins 2007).

Pauwels et al. (2011) further divide the internet shopper market into three keysegments. Smart Fans are those customers who react most positively to thee-commerce efforts of the firm and its competitors. They are more likely to be male,have more kids, and are more highly educated. Fun Loving Locals show a weakerneed for the market offerings of the firm and its competitors. These customers aremore involved with online gaming and sending e-cards. They tend to live closer tothe firm’s stores, have less higher education, and have fewer children than cus-tomers in the other segments. Fashionables are not very price sensitive and focustheir online behavior on broader themes such as fashion, gift giving and ‘especiallyfor you.’

While these studies have emphasized business-to-consumer markets, multiplechannels are used to reach business-to-business markets, as well. These marketsare typically segmented on the basis of (1) geographic location, such as the Euro-zone (Moriarity and Moran 1990; Raulerson et al. 2009); (2) customer size, such asnumber of employees or company sales volume (Raulerson et al. 2009) or in termsof purchase volume (Moriarity and Moran 1990); (3) industry, such as machinerymanufacturing, paper products wholesaling, or commercial banking (Moriarity andMoran 1990; Raulerson et al. 2009), and (4) product boundaries, such as mid-rangeand high-end copiers versus low-end machines (Moriarity and Moran 1990).

The point of this discussion is that customers are different—they have differentneeds and wants, shop differently, are characterized by different demographics,


and hold different life styles. The different marketing channels are needed to reachand satisfy these different customer segments. The challenge is to orchestrate thefirm’s multiple channels to produce a viable symphony of customer satisfactionand firm profits, instead of a cacophony of unhappy customers and shareholders.

2.3 Integrating Multiple Marketing Channels

One key to success in managing multiple marketing channels is their integration(Neslin and Shankar 2009). Coordinating the marketing channel service outputsoffered through each channel is the essence of integrating multi-channel opera-tions. Because most firms have added electronic channels to their multi-channelportfolio, understanding the level of e-commerce utilization is the starting point fordeveloping an integrated multi-channel marketing channel strategy.

According to Karjaluoto and Huhtamaeki (2010), firms can be categorizedaccording to four different levels of e-commerce utilization, depending upon theextent to which marketing channel service outputs are provided through electronicchannels. With the most basic or informational level of e-commerce utilization,firms provide their customers with product information and, in essence, use theinternet as an electronic ‘‘brochure’’ for their goods and services (Karjaluoto andHuhtamaeki 2010, p. 33). The next level of e-commerce utilization is the com-munication level. This level incorporates mechanisms for customer feedback andinteraction with the firm; it also employs more sophisticated means of commu-nicating with the marketplace (e.g., newsletters). The transactional level repre-sents the third level of e-commerce utilization (Karjaluoto and Huhtamaeki 2010).At this level, firms conduct transactions with their customers and offer them withpre- and post-purchase services. The final step in e-commerce utilization is whenelectronic channels become an integrated part of business. At this level, firmsintegrate e-channels with their traditional channels (e.g., bricks and mortar stores,external sales force) so that customers can mix and match where they receivevarious channel service outputs from the firm. This is the step where a customercan order online, pick the product up from a nearby store, and return a defectiveproduct via direct mail or to a store.

In summarizing the literature, Lee and Kim (2010) identified four dimensions ofmulti-channel integration. They include reinforcement, synergy, reciprocity, andcomplementarity. Reinforcement occurs when a firm offers consistent merchan-dise, prices, messaging, and customer service through all of its channels, and whenthose channels reinforce the efforts of each other (Lee and Kim 2010). When firmsallow customers to utilize different channels to obtain their desired portfolio ofservice outputs, synergy among those channels is said to occur (Lee and Kim2010). The reciprocity dimension of multi-channel integration means that no onechannel ‘‘dominates the other[s]; instead, [they] … support each other …’’ therebyproviding customers with ‘‘more advantages [when they use] … both together’’(Lee and Kim 2010, p. 284). The final dimension of multi-channel integration is


complementarity. ‘‘Complementarity is the concept by which a company under-stands the strengths and weaknesses of each channel and applies different strate-gies accordingly …’’ (Lee and Kim 2010, p. 285).

A firm that utilizes multiple marketing channels faces several options formanaging those channels: (1) an offline focused strategy, (2) online focusedstrategy, (3) an isolation strategy, or (4) an integration strategy (Müller-Lankenauet al. 2006).

The offline focused strategy emphasizes brick-and-mortar stores and usese-commerce channels to drive demand to those stores by providing informationabout store locations, in-store goods and services, and special promotions.‘‘Potential motivations for pursuing this strategy are a sophisticated distributionsystem optimized for providing goods to a network of shops, a differentiationstrategy focused on in-store customer consulting services, which cannot be offeredon the Web, or contractual restrictions vis-à-vis channel partners’’ (Müller-Lankenau et al. 2006, p. 190). Aldi, the global discount food retailer based inGermany, is a prominent practitioner of this strategy.

In contrast, the online focused strategy emphasizes e-commerce channels anduses its offline channels to drive demand toward its lower cost, higher marginonline operations. Netflix (the U.S.-based DVD sales and rental company) followsthis strategy. While customers can still receive DVDs by mail (its traditionaloffline channel), the company emphasizes online video streaming.

An isolation strategy is pursued when online and offline channels are managed as separateor independent entities …. Neither communication activities nor incentives or explicitlinks support or encourage customers to switch between channels (Müller-Lankenau et al.2006, p. 190).

These authors argue that the desire to target different market segments or to avoidchannel conflict motivate the use of this strategy. When Wal-mart first enterede-commerce it pursued an isolation strategy; however, its e-commerce and bricks-and-mortar channels have become much more integrated in the past five years.

An integration strategy sees multiple channels as complementary routes toproviding customers with the service output bundles that they desire (Müller-Lankenau et al. 2006). An example of this strategy is Walmart’s Site to Storeprogram which enables customers to shop online and pick up their orders at theirnearest Walmart store. In addition, customers can return online orders shipped totheir homes at their local Walmart store. These programs provide customers withtheir desired level of ordering convenience along with quick order delivery.

As noted earlier, one advantage of pursuing a multi-channel marketing strategyis the synergy that it provides. That advantage, however, ‘‘… can only be achievedthrough integration of the channels and continued focus on the customer, ratherthan the channel’’ (Schoenbachler and Gordon 2002, p. 47). This means that thesynergies promised by integrating the firm’s multiple channels, including itse-commerce channels, are only possible when those channels reinforce, comple-ment, and balance each other without losing their focus on customer.


2.4 Marketing Channel Conflict and DemandCannibalization

While the promise of channel synergy attracts firms to a multi-channel strategy,the possibility of demand cannibalization repels them (Neslin and Shankar 2009).If the addition of new channels entices new customers and/or causes existingcustomers to expand their purchases, the increase in demand can produce channelsynergies (Zhang et al. 2010). In contrast, if new customers fail to materialize orexisting customers shift their purchases from one channel to another withoutincreasing their level of demand, cannibalization is likely to occur. In other words,the firm’s multiple channels divide a fixed demand pie rather than sharing anexpanded one.

Cannibalization is most likely to occur when the goods offered and pricescharged across the various channels overlap considerably (Deleersnyder et al.2002), and when the services offered vary considerably (Rangan 2006). Theseconditions represent fertile ground for marketing channel conflict to take root, asmultiple channels target and pursue the same customer segments (Coelho andEasingwood 2004).

Vertical competition, differing goals, and distributor free-riding are three sit-uations in which cannibalization, and subsequent channel conflict, can occur.

When a firm markets through its own outlets (e.g., e-commerce) as well asindependent distributors, vertical competition ensues. Vertical competitionbecomes particularly intense when a firm undercuts the prices of its independentdistributors by charging lower prices through its e-commerce channels (cf. Wei-gand 1977). Such a situation causes distrust and disgruntlement among its inde-pendent channel partners.

When a firm’s e-commerce channels attract the same customers as the firm’sindependent distributors, disputes occur over who owns the customer (Eggert et al.2012; Hagel and Lansing 1994). If suppliers believe that they own the customer,they are likely to develop marketing programs to build brand loyalty and to utilizewhichever channels they can to reach the customer. If distributors believe that theyown the customer, they are more responsive to marketing efforts that steer cus-tomers to them (i.e., build distributor revenue and loyalty). These different goalsrepresent a classic cause of marketing channel conflict (Brown and Day 1981;Dant and Schul 1992).

A final example is free-riding. Free-riding occurs when consumers evaluate andcompare products in a full-service channel outlet (e.g., specialty photographyshop), and make their purchases in a low-cost, lower-service channel outlet (e.g.,discount mass merchandiser). A particular example of free-riding is the notion of‘‘showrooming,’’ wherein a consumer evaluates a product in a ‘‘bricks-and-mortar’’store, then buys it from a competitive e-commerce website (Zimmerman 2012).

Free-riding occurs because marketers cannot separate their markets. In otherwords, price-conscious customers are able to shop at those outlets targeted toservice-oriented customers. For example, apparel shoppers can visit bricks-and-


mortar stores to compare a garment’s product quality, color, and size, and thenshop online for lower prices. As a result, low-price outlets can benefit from or free-ride on the services provided by full-service outlets.

The next section describes a number of techniques for reducing the likelihoodof demand cannibalization across a multi-channel system. These techniques alsolimit the subsequent level of conflict that stems from operating multiple channels.

2.5 Managing Multiple Channel Conflict

Effective conflict management can help firms overcome the problems that resultfrom cannibalization in multiple channel systems. It involves managing the marketoffering to dis-incentivize distributors from seeking other channels’ customers, andcustomers from seeking the market offering from alternative channels. The basicchallenge is to insulate one marketing channel’s customers from another’s.

One way in which firms can manage cannibalization is to set product and/orcustomer boundaries (Moriarty and Moran 1990; Rangan 2006). With productboundaries, the objective is to route different products through different channels.For example, a manufacturer of portable generators could market its heavy dutyproducts to building and road contractors through industrial distributors. Home-owners, however, might find its lighter duty products in hardware stores, homeimprovement centers, and warehouse clubs. Customers may be classifiedaccording to geographic location, order size, account size, or industry (Moriartyand Moran 1990; Rangan 2006). Further, some firms such as Snap-on, the handtool maker, restrict their channels to solely service named accounts.

As long as product boundaries and customer boundaries can be maintained,different prices may be charged in different channels because ‘‘…the value bundleis well differentiated in the customers’ eyes’’ (Rangan 2006, p. 192). However, assoon as customers fail to see meaningful differences in the channels’ offerings,they will migrate to the lowest price channel. Therefore, maintaining price con-vergence is another way in which cannibalization and, hence, channel conflict canbe limited (Rangan 2006).

Price differences, however, may stem from differences in costs—not just thecosts of goods sold, but the costs of providing value-added services (e.g., personalselling support) to the customer. Suppliers can compensate for cost differences byreimbursing their distributors for these additional services (Rangan 2006). Theycan also develop ways of rewarding one channel for its role in generating sales(e.g., bricks-and-mortar store), even though the customer may have bought theproduct through another channel (e.g., internet) (Neslin and Shankar 2009).

In addition to managing the supply issues surrounding the use of multiplemarketing channels, issues of demand also require attention. Verhoef et al. (2007)identified the research shopper—those customers who search for information aboutproducts and services in one marketing channel and subsequently make theirpurchases in another. Research shoppers represent the essence of cannibalization.


Verhoef and his colleagues described three steps for limiting research shopperbehavior, thereby reducing the extent of cannibalization in multiple marketingchannels.

One step is to make e-commerce more attractive for purchases ‘‘… by adding areal-time shopping assistant to improve service, and adopting and publicizing atransparent and strict privacy policy’’ (Verhoef et al. 2007, p. 142). Another step isto increase customer lock-in through effective customer relationship management(e.g., the Amazon.com CRM system that incorporates a ‘‘Wish List,’’ ‘‘One-Click’’shopping, and makes recommendations based on previous purchases). Suchtechniques make it easier for customers to stay at the website to buy rather thanmigrating to other channels for purchase. The third step is to reduce cross-channelsynergy by implementing an isolation strategy. Because firms that adopt thisstrategy see multiple channels as being separate and distinct, they make no effort tomove customers from one channel to another. Indeed, they make such migrationdifficult.

These measures for overcoming cannibalization assume that multiple channelsdo little to expand overall demand for the firm’s goods and services. However, oneimportant reason for embarking on a multi-channel marketing strategy is to gainthe synergies possible by offering customers more than one way in which they canobtain their desired portfolio of marketing channel service outputs. In other words,a truly effective multi-channel strategy expands total demand for the firm by bettersatisfying its customers.

2.6 Shaping Multiple Channel Performance

Ultimately, firms employ multiple marketing channels to improve their levels ofperformance. The performance of a multi-channel system hinges on customerattributes as well as characteristics of the multi-channel system itself. We beginwith customer characteristics.

2.6.1 Customer Characteristics

An important outcome for a multi-channel system is customer satisfaction, whichoccurs at several levels. For example, customers can evaluate their satisfactionwith store employees, the store itself, its internet channels, and its telephone callcenter, according to which channel they patronize. Birgelen et al. (2006) foundthat, in the banking industry, these assessments of satisfaction can generate futurepatronage intentions, depending on whether customers’ transactions involve rou-tine or non-routine services. Customers can also assess their satisfaction with thetransaction or purchase. Research has found that satisfaction with the purchasestrengthens customer loyalty to the retailer, and this effect is stronger for multi-channel customers than single format buyers (Wallace et al. 2004).


Customers’ experiences with one (or more) of the firm’s channels can affecttheir reactions to the firm, in general, and its other channels, in particular. Mon-toya-Weiss et al. (2003) found that customers’ assessments of service quality forboth a firm’s online and bricks-and-mortar stores positively influenced their levelsof satisfaction with the retailer. Similarly, customers’ positive attitudes toward oneof the firm’s channels (e.g., its e-commerce website) can favorably impact theirintentions to shop through another of the firm’s channels (e.g., its brick and mortarstores) (Kwon and Lennon 2009).

2.6.2 Channel System Characteristics

In addition to customer characteristics, characteristics of the marketing channelstructure can affect the performance of the multi-channel system. For example,Lee and Kim (2010) found that customer loyalty to multi-channel firms can beshaped by the extent to which the firm integrates its multiple channels. In addition,customers of firms operating integrated multi-channel systems demonstrate greaterunplanned purchase amounts and are more satisfied, as compared to firms whosemulti-channel systems are not integrated (Chatterjee 2010).

One factor that enhances the integration of multi-channel operations is trustamong the different channel organizations (e.g., customer support call center andbrick-and-mortar store). Trust facilitates cooperation among these units, and morecooperation heightens the likelihood that these units will rely upon each other toprovide their customers with the desired bundle of channel service outputs (cf.Weitz et al. 2004).

Further, the firm’s capabilities for monitoring channel activities and providingincentives to align channel member interests produce higher levels of perfor-mance, especially when the firm operates complex multi-channel systems (Wal-lace et al. 2009).

2.6.3 Multi-channel Performance

How customers perceive each of the firm’s multiple marketing channels and howwell the firm can integrate its multi-channel operations affects the firm’s perfor-mance. Quality customer service produces satisfied customers whose positiveattitudes toward their experiences in one of the firm’s channels spill over into theirintentions to shop at the firm’s other channels. The more the firm is able to providea seamless experience to its customers through its integrated multiple channels, thehigher its level of performance.


3 Channel Demand Environment

A firm’s multiple marketing channels operate within at least two sets of marketdemand circumstances. In this chapter, we focus on: (1) the buying and selling pro-cesses, and (2) the channel life cycle. We start with the buying and selling processes.

3.1 Buying and Selling Stages

Buyers progress through a number of stages in their interactions with the firm and,with a multi-channel system, a firm’s different marketing channels play differentroles depending upon the buyer’s particular stage in the buying process (Moriarityand Moran 1990; Raulerson et al. 2009).

The upper portion of Fig. 4 depicts the various stages of the buying process.Note that the buying process does not end with the purchase, rather it continues asthe customer uses the product and may require support. Not shown is the feedbackloop that occurs when the customer replaces the product or supplements it withadditional products. Hence, a firm’s multiple channels must be designed to handlethese various stages of the customer buying process.

At the same time that buyers progress through the stages of the buying process,marketers move through the selling process, trying to match their customers’buying stages, as depicted in the bottom section of Fig. 4 (Raulerson et al. 2009).

Fig. 4 Multi-channel pathways to markets throughout the buying and selling cycles (based onMoriarity and Moran 1990; Raulerson et al. 2009)


The firm’s multiple marketing channels allow for this matching process to takeplace, as depicted by the middle portion of Fig. 4, which shows how variousmarketing channels interface with the different phases of the customer buyingcycle and the marketer’s selling process.

Clearly, these channels must be sufficiently integrated for the customer toobtain a satisfying portfolio of channel service outputs. The integration of the‘‘front end’’ channels (i.e., those that generate customer knowledge, interest, andactual purchase) with the ‘‘back end’’ channels (i.e., those that provide deliveryand product support) is particularly critical. Promises to the customer are made inthe ‘‘front end’’ channels, but must be realized through the ‘‘back end’’ channels. Ifthese promises are not met, the customer becomes dissatisfied and, in these days ofonline customer reviews, disseminates that dissatisfaction throughout the internet.

Different customers are arrayed in different buying stages, and customers ineach segment have different needs and wants. For example, customers in the‘‘information gathering’’ phase seek information about competitive brands andtheir relevant attributes. Those customers in the ‘‘take delivery’’ phase seekinformation about product delivery and are concerned about how best to install theproduct. Hence, the buying stages represent different market segments for the firmto target. The firm’s different marketing channels are differentially equipped tosatisfy these various needs. Customers’ needs and wants are best served when theyare seamlessly handed off from channel to channel they progress through thebuying process.

3.2 Channel Life Cycle1

Just as the use of specific channels varies over the stages of the buying and sellingprocesses, it also differs according to the life cycle stage of the market offering(Raulerson et al. 2009). The reason is that the firm’s marketing channel tasks varyas the market offering matures.

In the introduction phase of the channel life cycle (Fig. 5), the key objective isto induce innovators and early adopters to purchase the product. Innovators—thosewho try new products because of their newness—and early adopters—those whoseek new products to provide them with a relative advantage—comprise about16 % of the total market. The firm’s direct sales and e-commerce channels areeffective ways of reaching these target customers in this phase of the channel lifecycle.

In the growth phase, the goal is to begin the expansion of market coverage andto provide customers with a total market offering that completely satisfies theirneeds. The target market in this life cycle phase is the early majority whichcomprises about 34 % of the total market. This market segment tends to avoid risk

1 This section is largely based on and adapted from Raulerson et al. (2009, Ch. 5).


and, therefore, looks to tested solutions and channels that are able to absorb risk.Therefore, to reach this market and to serve its needs, additional channels areadded and their integration begins.

To reach the next 34 % of the market—the late majority—the firm acceleratesits expansion into additional marketing channels in the distribution coverage phaseof the channel life cycle. Late majority customers are price- and solution-sensitive;they want products and services that have proven their worth and are not willing tobuy innovations just to ‘‘lead the pack.’’ They are also more likely to purchasethrough channels with which they are familiar and have had positive experiences.

The last phase of the channel life cycle is the commoditization of the product.In this phase the distribution coverage is at its broadest and the use of multiplechannels is at its greatest in order to reach the remaining buyers. This final sixteenpercent of the market is composed of those who are the last to buy and those whowill never buy the product. In the later stages of the commoditization phase,because competition focuses on price and availability, cost pressures become high.As a result, the firm will ‘‘rationalize’’ its marketing channel system by eliminatingthose channels that no longer generate sufficient profits to justify their existence.

The three key tasks firms must perform during each phase of the channel lifecycle are to: (1) operate the channels needed to accomplish the necessary tasks ofthe current life cycle stage, (2) develop the channels needed to accomplish thetasks of the next phase, and (3) plan for routes to market for the firm’s next set ofnew products and services. In performing these tasks, firms must keep in mind thattheir customers look for a different portfolio of marketing channel service outputsthroughout the product’s life cycle.

Fig. 5 Multi-channel pathways to markets: life cycle phases (Source adapted from Raulersonet al. 2009)


3.3 Complexity of Market Demand Environment

The complexity of managing multiple marketing channels becomes apparent whenthe buying and selling processes are considered within each phase of the channellife cycle. At any one point in time, the firm will have customers in all phases ofthe channel life cycle and in all stages of the buying/selling process. The suc-cessful management of multiple channels compels firms to emphasize those seg-ments that promise the greatest long-term potential returns on investment, and todevelop additional such segments for the future.

4 Summary and Conclusions

We are living in an age of internet where e-commerce is as ubiquitous as thedepartment store was in yesteryear. One consequence of e-commerce is that it hasprovided an additional marketing channel for reaching target markets. Thus, thetwin goals of this chapter have been to map out the key aspects and components ofthe complex process of simultaneously managing multiple marketing channelsystems and to describe the pivotal role played by e-commerce in facilitating itssuccessful implementation.

Adopting a customer-centric perspective, we began this chapter by discussingthose benefits that customers hope to obtain from the marketing channels that theypatronize. We encouraged firms to recognize that their customers are heteroge-neous in the channel service outputs they seek. Hence, firms can best serve dif-ferent market segments by using different marketing channels or differentcombinations of marketing channels. The next imperative is that firms shouldensure that their multiple channels systematically operate in a synchronizedfashion to transmit a consistent value proposition to their customers through awell-devised multi-channel integration strategy. We caution against cannibaliza-tion and the resultant potential for channel conflict that can arise from verticalcompetition, goal incompatibility and distributor free-riding stemming from an ill-conceived multi-channel architecture. However, we posit that effective multi-channel integration can ensure minimal cannibalization and can generate superiormulti-channel performance payoffs for all channel constituents. Finally, we rec-ommended that channel decision-makers be cognizant of and accommodate thedemand environment that confronts the firm’s multiple marketing channels. Spe-cifically, the complexities and the differential effects of the buying and sellingstages and the channel life cycle stages cannot be ignored in designing a successfulmulti-channel system.

In the late 1990s, the term of disintermediation was coined and popularized toenvision a future retailing landscape where internet-based businesses that sell theirproducts directly to customers would eviscerate the traditional brick-and-mortarretail establishments. As noted before, not only has e-commerce not attained the


lofty position it was forecasted to achieve, increasingly, practitioners as well asacademic scholars are beginning to subscribe to a more reasoned perspective thate-commerce has transformed the traditional depiction of distribution channels, butwill not supplant its brick-and-mortar counterparts. This transformation is mostevident in the arenas of provision of product information and execution oftransactions. And, while it is true that no contemporary, respectable business canafford to be without a website, only a handful of e-commerce channels can providethe full gamut of service outputs that customers seek (i.e., locational convenience,temporal convenience, depth and breadth of assortment, desired and verifiableproduct quality and quantity, and support services like product information, pro-vision of credit, and after-sales services) all bundled at a single point of contact.This situation therefore necessitates a multi-channel structure that provides dif-ferent sets of utilities to the customer. Moreover, as also pointed out earlier, only alimited number of product categories lend themselves to a completely disinter-mediated transaction. Indeed, the emergent dogma seems to be one of re-inter-mediation where the traditional intermediaries will either rise to the occasion andlearn new ways to add customer value that e-commerce is simply not capable ofproviding, or they will be replaced by new intermediaries that do.

Some examples of these new emergent intermediaries that excel in providingadded value to the contemporary customers are Edmunds (edmunds.com), CAR-FAX (carfax.com), and iMotors (imotors.com). Edmunds.com provides consumerswith a vast repertoire of information about cars, including price comparisons,ratings, location of cars for sale, and the dealer’s true cost; carfax.com providesdetailed results of research on specific used cars and informs customers of vehi-cles’ past accident history or if their odometers were ever rolled back; and imo-tors.com offers its members discounts on insurance, gas, and repairs. Theimportant thing to note is that these same channel service outputs could be pro-vided by extant brick-and-mortar intermediaries.

Hence, e-commerce has not supplanted the extant intermediaries; it has merelyforced them to redefine the channel service outputs they must provide to survive inthis brave new world. This is the price of their survival.

References

Alba, J., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, R., Sawyer, A., et al. (1997, July). Interactivehome shopping: consumer, retailer, and manufacturer incentives to participate in electronicmarketplaces. Journal of Marketing, 61, 38–53.

van Birgelen, M., de Jong, A., & de Ruyter, K. (2006). Multi-channel service retailing: Theeffects of channel performance satisfaction on behavioral intentions. Journal of Retailing, 82,367–377.

Brown, J. R., & Day, R. L. (1981, August). Measures of manifest conflict in distribution channels.Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 263–274.

Chatterjee, P. (2010). Multiple-channel and cross-channel shopping behavior: Role of consumershopping orientations. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 28, 9–24.


Coelho, F., Easingwood, C., & Coelho, A. (2003). Exploratory evidence of channel performancein single vs. multiple channel strategies. International Journal of Retail and DistributionManagement, 31, 561–573.

Coelho, F. J. & Easingwood, C. (2004, September). Multiple channel systems in services: pros,cons, and issues. The Service Industries Journal, 24, 1–29.

Dant, R. P., & Schul, P. L. (1992, January). Conflict resolution processes in contractual channelsof distribution. Journal of Marketing, 56, 38–54.

Deleersnyder, B., Geyskens, I., Gielens, K., & Dekimpe, M. G. (2002, December). Howcannibalistic is the internet channel? A study of the newspaper industry in the UnitedKingdom and the Netherlands. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 337–348.

Eggert, A., Henseler, J., & Hollmann, S. (2012, April). Who owns the customer? Disentanglingcustomer loyalty in indirect distribution channels. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48,75–92.

Finlay, S. (2011, November). Consumers moving closer to buying cars online. Ward’s DealerBusiness, 45, 13–14.

Hagel, J., III. & Lansing, W. J. (1994, December). Who owns the customer? The McKinseyQuarterly, 63–75.

Karjaluoto, H., & Huhtamaeki, M. (2010). The role of electronic channels in micro-sized brick-and-mortar firms. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 23, 17–38.

Keen, C., Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K., & Feinberg, R. (2004, July). E-tailers versus retailers:Which factors determine consumer preferences. Journal of Business Research, 57, 685–695.

Konus�, U., Verhoef, P. C., & Neslin, S. A. (2008, December). Multichannel shopper segmentsand their covariates. Journal of Retailing, 84, 398–413.

Kumar, V., & Venkatesan, R. (2005, Spring). Who are the multichannel shoppers and how dothey perform? Correlates of multichannel shopping behavior. Journal of InteractiveMarketing, 19, 44–62.

Kwon, W.-S., & Lennon, S. J. (2009, September). Reciprocal effects between multichannelretailers’ offline and online brand images. Journal of Retailing, 85, 376–390.

Lee, H.-H., & Kim, J. (2010, October). Investigating dimensionality of multichannel retailer’scross-channel integration practices and effectiveness: shopping orientation and loyaltyintention. Journal of Marketing Channels, 17, 281–312.

McGoldrick, P. J., & Collins, N. (2007, May). Multichannel retailing: profiling the multichannelshopper. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 17,139–158.

Montoya-Weiss, M. M., Voss, G. B., & Grewal, D. (2003, Fall). Determinants of online channeluse and overall satisfaction with a relational, multichannel service provider. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 31, 448–458.

Moriarty, R. T., & Moran, U. (1990, November/December). Managing hybrid marketing systems.Harvard Business Review, 68, 146–155.

Müller-Lankenau, C., Wehmeyer, K., & Klein, S. (2006, April). Strategic channel alignment: Ananalysis of the configuration of physical and virtual marketing channels. Information Systemsand eBusiness Management, 4, 187–216.

Neslin, S. A., & Shankar, V. (2009, February). Key issues in multichannel customer management:current knowledge and future directions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23, 70–81.

Panteva, N., & Stampfli, D. (2012, April). From bricks to clicks. RMA Journal, 94, 52–56.Pauwels, K., Leeflang, P. S. H., Teerling, Marije L., & Huizingh, E. K. R. (2011, March). Does

online information drive offline revenues? Journal of Retailing, 87, 1–17.Preston, L. E., & Schramm, A. E, Jr. (1965, Winter). Dual distribution and its impact on

marketing organization. California Management Review, 8, 59–70.Rangan, V. K. (2006). Transforming your go-to-market strategy. Boston: Harvard Business

School Press.Raulerson, P., Malraison, J.-C., & Leboyer, A. (2009). Building routes to customers: Proven

strategies for profitable growth. New York: Springer.Rigby, D. (2011, December). The future of shopping. Harvard Business Review, 89, 65–76.


Schoenbachler, D. D., & Gordon, G. L. (2002). Multi-channel shopping: understanding whatdrives channel choice. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19, 42–53.

Shankar, V., Inman, J. J., Mantrala, M., Kelley, E., & Rizley, R. (2011, July). Innovations inshopper marketing: current insights and future research issues. Journal of Retailing, 87, S29–S42.

Stern, L. W., El-Ansary, A. I., & Brown, J. R. (1989). Management in marketing channels.Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Stern, L. W., & Sturdivant, F. D. (1987, July/August). Customer-driven distribution systems.Harvard Business Review, 65, 34–41.

Thomas, J. S., & Sullivan, U. Y. (2005, October). Managing marketing communications withmultichannel customers. Journal of Marketing, 69, 239–251.

T.P. (2011, February). Ecommerce sees double-digit growth. Multichannel Merchant, 7, 8.Van Bruggen, G. H., Antia, K. D., Jap, S. D., Reinartz, W. J., & Pallas F. (2010, August).

Managing marketing channel multiplicity. Journal of Service Research, 13, 331–340.Verhoef, P. C., Neslin, S. A., & Vroomen, B. (2007, June). Multichannel customer management:

Understanding the research-shopper phenomenon. International Journal of Research inMarketing, 24, 129–148.

Wallace, D. W., Giese, J. L., & Johnson, J. L. (2004). Customer retailer loyalty in the context ofmultiple channel strategies. Journal of Retailing, 80, 249–263.

Wallace, D. W., Johnson, J. L., & Umesh, U. N. (2009, November). Multichannels strategyimplementation: The role of channel alignment capabilities. Decision Sciences, 40, 869–900.

Weigand, R. E. (1977, January–February). Fit products and channels to your markets. HarvardBusiness Review, 55, 95–105.

Wiertz, C., de Ruyter, K., Keen, C., & Streukens, S. (2004, April). Cooperating for serviceexcellence in multichannel service systems: An empirical assessment. Journal of BusinessResearch, 57, 424–436.

Zhang, J., Farris, P. W., Irvin, J. W., Kushwaha, T., Steenburgh, T. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2010,May). Crafting integrated multichannel retailing strategies. Journal of Interactive Marketing,24, 168–180.

Zimmerman, A. (2012, April 11). Can retailers halt ‘showrooming’? The Wall Street Journal,259, B1–B8.


the role of e-commerce in multi- channel marketing strategy 406 e-retailing/handbook... · system....

Documents