DAGMAR Modeli: Deterjan Reklamları Örneğinde Görsel Bir Çözümleme

Year 2010, Issue: 24, 31 - 43, 01.08.2010

Hasret Aktaş Mücahid Zengin

Abstract

Reklamların günlük hayatımızın bir parçasıolmaya başlamasıyla birlikte araştırmacılarında konuya ilgisi fazlalaşmıştır. AIDA, NAIDAS ve benzeri modeller tüketicinin pazarlama iletişimi çabalarından nasıl etkilendiğini, hangi süreçlerden geçtiğini, onu satın alma davranışına götüren faktörleri ele alan ilk modellerdir. Kısa süre içerisinde yeni araştırma ve modeller bunlara katılmış, tüketicinin karar sürecini ve reklamın bu konudaki etkisini anlamaya yönelik çalışmalar hız kazanmıştır. DAGMAR bu sürecin doğal sonucu olan modellerden biridir. AIDA, NAIDAS gibi o da etkiler hiyerarşisi dizisindendir ve tıpkıdiğer modeller gibi bir ‘başharf’ kombinasyonudur. Bu modelde tüketicinin satın alma sürecinde etkin olan hiyerarşik komut zincirini anlatmaya çalışmaktadır. Bu çalışmada sadece AIDA’dan ibaret yerel reklam araştırmalarına bir katkısağlamak ve uzun süre önce ortaya konan bir reklam modelini örneklerle güncelleyip bilim ve sektör insanlarıtarafından daha iyi anlaşılmasınısağlamak amacıyla; DAGMAR modeli ayrıntılıbir şekilde incelenmiş, aşamalarıtelevizyonda yayınlanan deterjan reklamlarıörneğinde ele alınmıştır.

Keywords

Reklam Modelleri, Etkiler Hiyerarşisi, DAGMAR Modeli

The DAGMAR Model: A Visual Analysis of Laundry Detergent Advertisement Samples

Abstract

As advertising becomes an important part of our daily lives, researchers are increasingly becoming interested in this topic. AIDA, NAIDAS and similar models are the first models trying to explain how consumers are affected from the marketing communications efforts directed at them, the processes that they are going through, and factors that make them buy products and services. In a short period of time, new studies and models are added to these, and researches that are trying to examine the effects of advertising have gained speed. The DAGMAR model is a result of this process. Similar to AIDA and NAIDAS, DAGMAR model is an hierarchy-of-effects model and is a combination the “first letters”. This model tries to explain the hierarchical steps in the buying behavior of consumers like other models. Hierarchy-of-effects models are proposed to define the steps that consumers are going through when they are exposed to marketing communications efforts. Thinking, feeling and doing are included in the steps defined. These models assume that everything happens in order and consumers should complete one step to be able to pass to the next step. These models are also called “linear models”. Similar to the Maslow model, one cannot pass to the next step before fulfilling the requirements of the previous steps. The first and most widely known hierarchy-of-effects model is AIDA. AIDA is an acronym for Attention, Interest, Desire and Action. It has been the inspiration for most of the models. The models developed after AIDA has been based on the steps defined by it. For instance, Robert Lavidge and Gary Steiner’s model identified the steps as Awareness, Knowledge, Liking, Preference, Conviction and Purchase. After Elmo Lewis’s AIDA, Sheldon’s AIDAS model, Kitson’s AIDCA model, Rogers’s AIETA model, Robertson’s ACALTA model, and Colley’s ACCA, or as widely known, DAGMAR model have been proposed. Colley related the hierarchical models with goals. Unlike other models, every step defined by the DAGMAR model is connected to a marketing communications goal. According to Colley, defining a marketing communications goal has these benefits: • People work harder if they have a clear definition of what they are trying to achieve. They can know what is their target and what problems they must overcome. • Goals make the team on track and prevent efforts wasted on wrong domains. • Goals let the sources used better and in a more effective way. Goals make results measurable. Organizations can make better predictions of budgets looking at the previous performance. DAGMAR acronym stands for Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results. This model has been proposed by Russell Colley in 1961. According to Colley, advertising’s job is simply to communicate, to a defined audience, information and a frame-of-mind that stimulate action. It succeeds of fails depending on how well it communicates the desired information and attitudes to the right people at the right time and at the right cost. This model encourages marketers to test advertising’s effectiveness before and after consumers have been exposed to the advertising. The DAGMAR model assumes that consumers are going through awareness, comprehension, conviction and action. The first step is to make consumers aware of the product and service. Consumer’s attention may be distracted by competing brands and awareness about a brand can be lowered because of this. Marketers should try to keep the awareness of consumers high. Awareness is not enough by itself to make consumers buy a brand. Consumers must have knowledge about the product or the organization. Key features of the brand must be presented to the consumer, because the associated benefits might be very important for them. They must be enlightened on the changes the product or service will make on their lives. Advertising messages must be communicated to the right people at the right time and at the right cost. Thus consumers can know the brand, recognize the package, and know what the product does. The third step is to convince people. According to Miller, to persuade people is to shape, change or reinforce their responses. To persuade consumers, marketers must shape the beliefs of consumers about a brand. This is generally achieved by presenting the superior features and associated benefits, so that consumers can think that a brand is better than the competitors. The final step is action, or the purchase of a product or service. Colley argues that advertising is not enough to make this process result in a sale. Brand must be of high quality, package must be attractive, and price must be right. In this study, we aim to contribute to the local advertising researches that are only focusing on AIDA, and to update this old model and help markets and scientists better understand it. For this purposes, we have examined the DAGMAR model in detail and studied laundry detergent commercials as an example. The finding of our research is as follows: In the “Konsantre Ariel Prozim 7” commercial, four steps of the DAGMAR model is present. To raise awareness, a successful business woman is shown. In the comprehension step, this protagonist tells his experience of saving money to the viewer. This presentation is appropriate to convince consumers. The aim is to prevent consumers from switching to cheaper products because of the economic crisis. The four basic steps of the model is also present in the “Vernel Esintili Persil Gül” commercial. The protagonist is a happy and smart mother and this is used to create awareness. To comprehend, hygiene and nice scent is presented. In addition to these, this detergent has another powerful brands “softness”. With these benefits, emotional cues are also used to convince consumers. In the “Tursilmatik Badem Sütü” commercial, product is the main protagonist. There is only a beautiful flower that may create awareness on the viewer. It can be said that the aim of this advertisement is to keep the awareness ratio. Hygiene is implied by “whiter than white” clothes, and pleasant scent is implied by the beautiful flower. The package is shown to make people remember the brand when shopping. The last commercial examined in this study is “Omo Sudaki Ayak İzim”. This commercial is different than the previous ones. Instead of the cleaning power, nice scent or softness of the clothes, it tries to raise awareness to a social topic. It tries to make consumers think about the water consumption and its consequences. According to the commercial, global warming is more important than the cleaning power. The awareness it creates is more striking. The apparent action expected from the consumer is visiting a website created by Omo about the topic and being responsible. The hidden action is of course, making a sale. Although presented in different ways, the basic steps proposed by the DAGMAR model can be seen in these commercials. This model is open for more research in the future

Keywords

Advertising Models, Hierarchy-of-Effects, DAGMAR Model

References

• Aktuğlu, I., (2006). Tüketicinin Bilgilendirilmesi Sürecinde Reklam Etiği. http://globalmedia- tr.emu.edu.tr/guz2006/Hakemli_Yazilar/Isil%20 Karpat%20Aktuglu.Reklam%20etigi.%20son.%20Onayli.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 10.03.2008.
• Ambler, T. (2000). Persuasion, pride and prejudice how ads work. International Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 299-315.
• Batra, R., Myers, J.G., Aaaker, D. (1995). Advertising Management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Belch, G.E., Belch, M.A. (2004). Advertising and Promotion an Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Çakır, V. (2006). Reklam ve Marka Tutumu. Konya: Tablet Yayınları.
• Duncan, T. (2005). Principles of Advertising and IMC. New York: McGraw Hill Irwin.
• Ehrenberg, A., Barnard, N., Kennedy, R., Bloom, H. (2002). Brand Advertising as Creative Publicity. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(4), 7-18.
• Engel, J., Blackwell, R., & Miniard, P. (1990). Consumer Behavior. Orlando: The Dryden Press.
• Fill, C. (2005). Marketing Communication Engagements, Strategies and Practice. New York: Pearson Education.
• Goode, A. (2007). The Implicit and Explicit Role of Ad Memory in Ad Persuasion Rethinking the Hidden Persuaders. International Journal of Market Research, 49(1), 95-116.
• Heath, R., Feldwick, P. (2007). Fifty years using the wrong model of Advertising. International Journal of Marketing Research, 50(1), 29-59.
• Pelsmacker, P.D., Geuens, M., Bergh, J.V. (2001). Marketing Communications. Essex: Pearson.
• Pickton, D., Broderick, A. (2001). Integrated Marketing Communications. Essex: Pearson.
• Reed, P.W., Ewing, M.T. (2004). How Advertising Works Alternative Situational and Attitudal Explanations. Marketing Theory, 4(1-2), 91-112.
• Stiff, J.B., Mongeau, P.A. (2003). Persuasive Communication. New York
• Weilbacher, W.M. (Kasım 2001). Point of View: Does Advertising Cause a Hierarchy of Effects?. Journal of Advertising Research.
• Wells, W., Burnett, J., & Moriarty S. (1998). Advertising Principles&Practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Wilmhurst, J., Mackay, A. (1999). The Fundementals of Advertising. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
• Yeshin, T. (2006). Advertising. London: Thomson Learning.