Part one of this article focused on the traditional 4 Ps of the marketing mix, encompassing the components of price, product, promotion, and place –– see here. Part two continues this discussion by elaborating on the extension to 8 Ps, specifically including people, physical evidence, process management, and productivity and quality. The article will provide examples and explanations within the context of sports brands.

People

The people component of the marketing mix considers two perspectives: The first perspective focuses on internal marketing and the importance of employees to an organisation’s marketing success. The second perspective urges brands to view consumers as individuals with specific lifestyles, understanding their wants and needs, rather than merely as participants in a monetary transaction (Kotler & Keller, 2012). Lovelock et al. (2008, p. 1/21) state, “Customers will often judge the quality of the service they receive largely on their assessment of the people providing the service,” highlighting the importance of recruiting, training, and motivating personnel for the sustainable success of a company and its products. Additionally, people both provide and receive brand experiences, meaning all stakeholders involved with a brand should be considered in the conceptualisation of marketing and communications campaigns (Schmitt, 1999). This includes employees involved in producing, supporting, and delivering products and services, as well as those supporting operations online or even a brand’s fans and followers on social media who co-create the experience with their engagement and contributions (Bühler & Nufer, 2013). In the sports industry, players, coaches, executives, and broadcasters can connect fans to the brand and thus be considered marketing assets (Fetchko et al., 2019). Similarly, in business-to-business (B2B) operations, business partners, clients, goods and facilities producers, and supporting services providers are stakeholders to be considered within the people component (Ferrand & McCarthy, 2009). Despite the term B2B referring to two companies doing business together, it is essential to understand that the business partnership or transaction is carried out between people.

Emotions can be evoked through face-to-face interaction (Schmitt, 1999). For example, a brand could use a host with strong ties to the brand and its community when creating videos for digital communication channels. This host should embody a personality that appeals to the target audience with credibility and familiarity (Fetchko et al., 2019). A hypothetical example in sports might be DAZN, a sports streaming platform, employing former professional boxer and heavyweight champion Mike Tyson to discuss boxing in a podcast or other digital content.

Schmitt (1999) also notes, “Interactions do not occur in a social vacuum” (p. 167), implying a direct co-creation of the brand experience between consumers and brands. In the context of physical events, this means that the atmosphere in the venue is co-created by the brand providing the experience and the people in the audience (Bühler & Nufer, 2013). For instance, World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) might organise an event like Wrestlemania, which comes alive through both the production of the WWE and the enthusiasm of the audience. In the digital age, an online brand experience can also be created by encouraging fans and followers to engage and contribute with comments and user-generated content on social media (Sutera, 2013). Such fan engagement can strengthen users’ attachment to a brand online and enhance brand loyalty (cf. Brakus et al., 2009; Newman et al., 2013). This is especially important in a post-Covid-19 lockdown world, where event experiences may want to be considered without audiences in a venue.

Digital communication channels provide convenient access and significant influence in virtually connecting people (Sutera, 2013). Such social influence among a brand’s fans can be amplified by creating an ‘Us vs. Them’ environment (Schmitt, 1999). In sports and other industries, club (or brand) affiliation among fans can be based on shared attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours, promoting self-categorisation and leading individuals to associate with like-minded and disassociate with unlike-minded people (Yocco, 2016). Nike’s Black Lives Matter campaign is an example of how a brand can position itself and influence its fans to do the same (Nike.com, 2020). The Multiple In-group Identity Framework by Lock and Funk (2016) categorises fans of a brand into three groups with varying degrees of inclusiveness:

• The ‘superordinate’ group, which is the most inclusive, includes all fans and consumers and represents the traditional idea of team and brand identity.
• The ‘subgroup’ offers more opportunities for social exchanges than the ‘superordinate’ group due to its physical proximity but is less inclusive due to its more close-knit circle of members.
• The ‘relational’ group provides the most opportunities for social exchanges, as its members often know each other and may be part of each other’s social circles outside of the sport or brand community. However, it is the least inclusive group for these reasons.

Physical Evidence

Lovelock et al. (2008, p. 1/22) observe that “the appearance of buildings, landscaping, vehicles, interior furnishing, equipment, staff members, signs, printed materials and other visible cues all provide tangible evidence” of a company’s existence and service quality. Additionally, physical evidence influences the impression consumers have of a brand, necessitating that environmental factors be carefully managed and developed. Al-Dmour et al. (2013), referencing Akroush and Al-Dmour (2006), suggest four question-items for a quantitative study to assess how a brand’s physical evidence impacts brand equity: (1) “The staff appears in attractive uniforms.” (2) “Public facilities (i.e., waiting space, queuing arrangements, etc.) of the company are comfortable and attractive.” (3) “My [product or service] provider uses modern and sophisticated equipment.” (4) “The overall atmosphere is comfortable.”

It might be argued that these tangible aspects should be included in the conceptualisation of aesthetics in the augmented product (refer to the ‘product’ component in part 1), but the significance of environmental factors is simply too great to be overlooked. An additional important perspective to consider is the impact of the aforementioned items on digital communication. For instance, (1) implementing a dress code or specific uniforms for all staff and helpers could enhance the brand experience (Schmitt, 1999). An example is provided by Sky Sports in Germany, a sports broadcaster. In select shows, commentators and guests adhere to a dress code consisting of a plain shirt and (usually) dark pants, with the Sky Sports logo discreetly positioned on the left-hand side of the chest; see Figure 1. An exception is the different shirt color worn by the female host, which appears to be a calculated decision, yet her dress code still follows a business casual style. Additionally, public facilities play a crucial role in places like stores, shopping malls, or sporting events (Fullerton, 2010). Similarly, (2) the sensory experience is equally important online, which involves offering an appealing sensory experience on the web (Khan et al., 2016). This could mean an attractive website design (Palmer, 2002) or a user-friendly interface for a comfortable user experience (Ryan, 2016), among other aspects. Regarding (3) ‘modern and sophisticated equipment,’ it is reasonable to assume that consumers expect up-to-date, not outdated, equipment or software. In the digital realm, this could include an easy-to-navigate and responsive website design (Kim, 2013). If users struggle to navigate a brand’s ‘virtual facilities,’ they may not enjoy the experience (Khan et al., 2016). Another example is the usability of a streaming app or platform like Netflix, or in the sports industry, DAZN or NBA TV. Finally, (4) the ‘overall atmosphere’ can be enhanced by providing consumers with a satisfying brand experience, building upon the previous three elements. Revisiting the example of Sky Sports, if (1) their commentators and staff provide a congruent sensory experience, (2) their production consistently follows the same branding aesthetics, and (3) the user experience on desktop, tablet, and smartphone is convenient, comfortable, and of the highest quality, then (4) the physical evidence will likely please consumers, who may in turn promote the experience through word-of-mouth.

Process Management

According to Lovelock et al. (2008, p. 1/23), “Creating and delivering product elements to customers requires the design and implementation of effective processes. A process describes the method and sequence of actions in which service operating systems work. Badly designed processes are likely to annoy customers when the latter experience slow, bureaucratic and ineffective service delivery. Similarly, poor processes make it difficult for front-line staff to do their jobs well, result in low productivity and increase the likelihood of service failures.” Additionally, processes can impact the delivery and, consequently, the perceived quality of a product or service, which can harm customer relationships, especially if these processes are poorly executed or of low quality (Kotler & Keller, 2012).

In services marketing, the delivery of services and products can be executed through tangible or intangible actions and directed at people’s bodies (people processing) or minds (mental processing stimulus), or they can target people’s possessions (possession processing) or assets (information processing) (Lovelock et al., 2008).

People processing involves tangible actions carried out for customers who are physically present, allowing them to benefit from the purchased product. In sports, for instance, this could include engaging fans in stadium choreography at an ice hockey match. Attending such an event offers the benefit of participating in and contributing to the stadium atmosphere, which can be seen as an augmented product delivering a tangible benefit. Another example is providing food and drinks at a venue. In a digital context, people processing might involve active engagement by the brand through social media with event viewers (Sutera, 2013), which became increasingly important following the Covid-19 outbreak in 2020. Some sports organisations, responding to government bans on live event attendance, took this approach a step further. For instance, the National Basketball Association (NBA) implemented digital screens in stadiums to include virtual fans via livestream (NBA.com, 2020). For such processes, the marketer’s task is to assess and define the necessary steps to ensure the success of initiatives like choreography or to ensure virtual fans enjoy a high-quality livestream experience.

Possession processing involves tangible actions performed on the physical possessions of customers; this includes any value-adding activity that occurs during the lifetime of a physical or digital possession. For example, in the context of team sports entertainment merchandise, such an action could entail customising a jersey with a player’s name and number. Another example is the repair and maintenance of sporting equipment, like a mountain bike or race bike. In the realm of digital services and products, possession processing can involve account modifications, such as upgrading a basic package at Sky Sports, which includes German and English football, to include broadcasts of all Swiss ice hockey league matches; it could also involve downgrading an account if a viewer loses interest in a specific offering. Similarly, for digital platforms, an important process is the proactive updating of software and apps to ensure the optimal delivery of digital services. However, depending on one’s perspective, such an update might be categorised as information processing (see below).

Mental stimulus processing. Lovelock et al. (2008, p. 2/8) state, “Mental stimulus processing refers to intangible actions directed at people’s minds. Services in the mental stimulus processing category include entertainment, spectator sports events, theatrical performances, and education. In such instances, customers must be present mentally but can be located either in a specific service facility or in a remote location connected by broadcast signals or telecommunication linkages.” A prime example in sports for entertainment purposes might involve delivering a sporting event, such as a football match or a UFC fight, to a viewer in the venue, on TV, or via online streaming. However, watching a sporting event for educational purposes also fits into this category; for instance, observing a figure skating competition to learn new moves involves viewers actively thinking and processing the material before applying it (cf. Pine and Gilmore, 1999). Another product or service aimed at people’s minds could be advertising activities. Based on the understanding that advertising primarily influences brand awareness, brand imagery, and emotional response (Batra and Keller, 2016), Nike’s 2020 campaign ‘You Can’t Stop Us’ is a successful example. It showcases various sports and athletes, establishes a clear brand image, and evokes strong emotions through its commitment to contemporary issues such as #BlackLivesMatter and other movements (see video below). Although this type of processing is based on intangible actions, Sisodia and Chowdhary (2012) found that tangible cues in advertisements are crucial in communicating with target audiences, making core products and benefits comprehensible and strengthening the association between recipients and the brand or company. Based on this, it can be argued that tangible cues are essential in the communication of sporting events, as the main product is a competition occurring in a specific venue. This can be utilised in the brand’s storytelling to reinforce the brand’s narrative (Yocco, 2016), which is, once again, an action directed at the recipient’s mind.

Information processing involves intangible actions directed at consumers’ assets, which may include operations such as data processing, billing, consulting, etc. The information processing model was originally conceptualised on the premise that the more uncertain a task is, the more information must be exchanged between decision-makers during the task’s performance to achieve a certain quality level. Conversely, if the task is clear from the outset, it can be pre-planned, saving time and effort (Galbraith, 1974). Therefore, it is advisable for the product or service to follow a clearly structured and transparent process that eliminates any uncertainty, reducing the need for users to contact customer care hotlines. An example could be the billing process of an online service like DAZN: The platform may offer various payment methods, such as monthly credit card or PayPal transactions. Providing a clear explanation of how the transaction works reduces customer uncertainty and builds trust that the process will be executed correctly each month (cf. Yocco, 2016). The same principle applies to other forms of information processing. According to Sisodia and Chowdhary (2012), this category emphasises visualisation, suggesting that visuals can enhance the delivery of more informative messages. Given the ubiquity of digital media and the channels available for distributing messages, users can easily gather and share information (Sutera, 2013). At the same time, they expect to find and understand information with minimal effort (cf. Galbraith, 1974), making Galbraith’s (1974) concept of a transparent and certain information process relevant once again in a digital context.

Productivity and Quality

The final of the 8 Ps has been termed differently in various literature sources, such as performance (Kotler & Keller, 2012), personalisation (Goldsmith, 1999), and productivity and quality (Lovelock et al., 2008). The subsequent section merges three perspectives to present a cohesive view on the productivity and quality element.

According to Kotler and Keller (2012) “performance as in holistic marketing, to capture the range of possible outcome measures that have financial and nonfinancial implications (profitability as well as brand and customer equity), and implications beyond the company itself (social responsibility, legal, ethical, and community related)” (p. 26; italics added). This broadens the context of marketing and underscores its significance on the overall outcome of a company’s activities from both internal and external perspectives. Goldsmith (1999) introduces a different angle with the ‘new marketing responsibility,’ asserting, “the Personalisation decision is so important that it should be among the first decisions managers make so that the degree and nature of product personalisation should guide subsequent marketing decisions” (p. 179; italics added). This implies that allowing potential buyers to personalise a brand’s products or services creates a unique product for every consumer. Lovelock et al. (2008, p. 1/21; italics added) largely synthesise these arguments, stating, “Productivity relates to how inputs are transformed into outputs that are valued by customers, while quality refers to the degree to which a service satisfies customers by meeting their needs, wants and expectations. Improving productivity is essential to keep costs under control, but managers must beware of making inappropriate cuts in service levels that are resented by customers (and perhaps by employees, too). Service quality, as defined by customers, is essential for product differentiation and for building customer loyalty. However, investing in quality improvement without understanding the trade-off between incremental costs and incremental revenues may place the profitability of the firm at risk.”

The key takeaway from these definitions is that productivity and perceived quality can increase if brands offer personalisation opportunities to users and consumers, which in a digital society equates to additional interaction and engagement possibilities with the brand through digital channels. This concept aligns indirectly with Schmitt’s (1999) Experiential Marketing, where interactive campaigns are designed to add experiential value to a brand experience and enhance brand satisfaction and loyalty. This is further emphasised by Pine and Gilmore (1998, p. 102), who state that “Escapist experiences can teach just as well as educational events can, or amuse just as well as entertainment, but they involve greater customer immersion; acting in a play, playing in an orchestra, or descending the Grand Canyon involve both active participation and immersion in the experience.” Hence, it can be inferred that involving users and consumers in the co-creation process of a product or brand experience empowers them, fosters a deeper connection to the brand community, and makes them feel like an integral part of the brand.

Ramaswamy (2008) suggests that co-creation between a brand and its customers should be based upon the DART model, which includes

• dialogue between the brand and users, as well as between users (how to communicate);
• access between the brand and users (how to receive and experience product or service);
• risk-return for both users and the brand, because the personalisation of a product or service can reduce the risk that a customer may not like the product, since it was co-created by the user; similarly, the company lowers the risk of losing a customer, because the perceived quality of the product is higher since the customer enhanced it herself; and
• transparency of information, possibilities and opportunities for users.

In the context of sports, consider the example of shopping for merchandise online, such as at the Juventus FC online store. Dialogue would facilitate the possibility for users and the brand to communicate through a website chat option. Similarly, dialogue among users could be enabled through comments on shopping items, which can be beneficial for a potential customer who has a question about an item or wants to consult comments from previous buyers. However, none of these features were found while randomly selecting the item ‘Juventus Third Authentic Jersey 2020/21’ and reviewing the site.

Access refers to the ease with which the product or service can be received and experienced. For the aforementioned jersey, this might include the shopping experience offered to users, such as the simplicity of navigating the online shop, finding and modifying features, or the enjoyment of shopping on the website (Palmer, 2002). Another aspect could be the ease of accessing the website for shopping purposes from a smartphone, where a responsive website design would enhance the user experience (Ryan, 2016). Additionally, access to specific software that allows users to personalise the jersey with a name and number – a popular feature – would enhance the user experience. This is effectively implemented in the Juventus online shop.

The risk-return relationship is based on the idea that the risk of dissatisfaction with the purchased product is minimised because buyers co-create the product to align it closely with their preferences. In this case, personalisation features include selecting the size, flocking, and badges. More extensive personalisation could involve changing the jersey’s color, modifying or removing the chest sponsor, or altering the shirt’s cut. However, this raises the question, ‘How much personalisation is necessary to satisfy users without compromising the branding aspect of the product?’

Lastly, transparency aims to provide “all the information, which might be helpful to improve the outcome of the service experience” (Solakis et al., 2017, p. 542). This could include accessing previous purchase history, often offered in online shops, as well as details about additional costs like top-ups, postal delivery, customs, etc. Total transparency might also involve revealing the production costs of a specific product and the profit margins.

Lovelock et al. (2008) discuss four steps that increase productivity and quality of co-producing customers:

• Compare the present role that consumers and users hold in the business and the role the company would like them to hold.
• Assess if consumers and users are aware that the brand expects them to undertake a certain performance, i.e. co-produce a product or experience, and if they possess the necessary knowledge and skills.
• Ensure motivation of consumers and users by clearly communicating rewards and benefits of the co-production performance.
• Appraise the co-production performance of consumers and users on a regular basis to ensure that the necessary quality is upheld and that they know which knowledge or skills need to be improved.

An example of online communication for a sports brand might be as follows: Brands like Adidas, Nike, or Puma aim to incorporate crowdsourced content from fans and followers on social media into a video report. Firstly, the brand needs to assess whether its fans and followers are willing to contribute footage in accordance with specific guidelines. This analysis can be based on previous interactions between the club and its users; the brand may have already encouraged minor contributions from fans in earlier posts, akin to a ‘foot in the door’ approach (cf. Yocco, 2016). Secondly, the brand should provide detailed instructions on what it expects from users and ensure they understand how to complete the task. For instance, the club could issue clear video guidelines, such as ‘The video should be shot horizontally (16:9) in 1080p, should feature you wearing sneakers from our brand, and be no longer than 5 seconds.’ Next, the brand ought to consistently emphasise the benefits and rewards of participation to keep fans motivated. In this scenario, incentives could include ‘5 seconds of fame’ on the brand’s social media channels, a discount coupon for selected videos, or similar rewards. Finally, the submitted videos from fans need to be evaluated. This could involve an open review process by the community, which carries the risk of trolling and negative feedback. Alternatively, the brand could establish an internal panel, introduced to the community, to review all relevant submissions and provide feedback to those not selected for the video. This approach aims to ensure that contributors who aren’t selected this time remain encouraged to participate in future opportunities.

Conclusion 

The 8 Ps of the marketing mix encompass the 4 Ps of the traditional marketing mix – price, product, promotion, and place – and extend to the contemporary marketing mix by adding people, physical evidence, process management, and productivity and quality. This expansion, while based on the services marketing mix as suggested by Lovelock et al. (2008), can be broadly applied to products as well. This article has provided an overview of how the 8 Ps can be addressed and implemented in a digital context. Although both theory and practical examples were presented, the discussions on each respective element are not exhaustive and can be further enriched with additional perspectives and examples.

List of references 

• Al-Dmour, H., Zu’bi, M.F. and Kakeesh, D. (2013). The effect of services marketing mix elements on customer-based brand equity: an empirical study on mobile telecom service recipients in Jordan. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(11), pp. 13-26.
• Akroush, M., and Al-Dmour, H. (2006). The Relationship between Brand-Building Factors and Branding Benefits in Commercial Banks Operating in Jordan: An Empirical Investigation of managers’ perspectives. Jordan Journal of Business Administration, 2(3), pp. 464-486.
• Batra, R. and Keller, K.L. (2016). Integrating Marketing Communications: New Findings, New Lessons, and New Ideas. Journal of Marketing, 80, pp. 122-145.
• Brakus, J., Schmitt, B. and Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), pp. 52-68.
• Bühler, A. and Nufer, G. (2014). International Sports Marketing: Principles and Perspectives, ed. 1st ed. Berlin: Erich Schmid Verlag.
• Facebook.com/lothar.matthaeus. (2017). Team Super Samstag Germany bei Sky Sports DE. [online] Available at: https://www.facebook.com/lothar.matthaeus/photos/a.900688663278052/1727775990569311/ [Accessed 23 August 2020].
• Ferrand, A. and McCarthy, S. (2009). Marketing the Sports Organisation: Building Networks and Relationships. London: Routledge.
• Fetchko, M.J., Roy, D.P. and Clow, K.E. (2019). Sports Marketing, 2nd ed. Milton Park, Abington, Oxon: Routledge.
• Fullerton, S. (2010). Sports Marketing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Galbraith, J.R. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view. INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics, 4(3), pp. 28-36.
• Jin, N.P., Line, N.D. and Merkebu, J. (2016). The Impact of Brand Prestige on Trust, Perceived Risk, Satisfaction, and Loyalty in Upscale Restaurants. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 25(5), pp. 523-546.
• Khan, I., Rahman, Z. and Fatma, M. (2016). The concept of online corporate brand experience: an empirical assessment. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34(5), pp. 711-730.
• Kim, B. (2013). The Library Mobile Experience: Practices and User Expectations. 6th ed. Illinois, IL: American Library Association.
• Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L. (2012). Marketing Management. 14th ed. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.
• Lock, D.J. and Funk, D.C. (2016). The multiple in-group identity framework. Sport Management Review, 19(2), pp. 85-96.
• Lovelock, C.H., Vandermerwe, S., Lewis, B., and Fernie, S. (2008). Services Marketing. Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt university.
• NBA.com. (2020). How virtual fans found their seats at NBA season restart. [online] NBA.com. Available at: https://www.nba.com/article/2020/08/10/virtual-fans-help-restart-atmosphere [Accessed 23 August 2020].
• Newman, T., Peck, J., Harris, C. and Wilhide, B. (2013). Social media in sport marketing. Scottsdale, Arizona: Holcomb Hathaway, Publishers.
• Nike.com. (2020). NIKE, Inc. Statement on Commitment to the Black Community. [online] Nike.com. Available at: https://news.nike.com/news/nike-commitment-to-black-community [Accessed 22 Aug. 2020].
• Palmer, J.W. (2002). Web site usability, design, and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(2), pp. 151-167. 
• Pine II, J. and Gilmore, J. (1999). The Experience Economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
• Ramaswamy, V. (2008). Co-creating value through customers’ experiences: the Nike case. Strategy & Leadership, 36(5), pp. 9-14.
• Ryan, D. (2016). Understanding Digital Marketing. 4th ed. London: Kogan Page.
• Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential Marketing: How to Get Customers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, Relate to your Company and Brands. New York: Free Press.
• Sisodia, S. and Chowdhary, N. (2012). Internal Marketing: Analysis of Recruitment Advertisements. The Indian Journal of Commerce, 65(2), pp. 284-293.
• Solakis, K., Peña-Vinces, J.C. and Lopéz-Bonilla, J.M. (2017). DART model from a customer’s perspective: an exploratory study in the hospitality industry of Greece. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(2-3), pp. 536-548.
• Sutera, D. (2013). Sports Fans 2.0: How Fans Are Using Social Media to Get Closer to the Game. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press.
• Yocco, V. S. (2016). Design for the Mind: Seven Psychological Principles of Persuasive Design, 1st ed., Shelter Island, NY: Manning Publications.