Advanced Marketing Summary
GEST D- 403
Prof. Christian Bluemelhuber
Submitted on January 11, 2011
For the rest of the project please go to
to see our blog!
Submitted by:
Meaghan Kuntz 103706
Vladimir Shevchenko 103867
Carolina Lima Reis Teixeira 103728
Elif Damla Akbulut 103483
Renaud Deviere 040916
Advanced Marketing- Project Summary
Aesthetics is defined as ‘’a guiding principle in matters of artistic beauty and taste; artistic sensibility and/or an underlying principle, a set of principles, or a view often manifested by outward appearances or style of behaviour” (Oxford Dictionary 2010). Sometimes it not only from a visual capacity that one can define what is aesthetically beautiful, one ishas to rely on other factors in order to make an informed judgement. This project attempts to look at whether the experience of marketing can truly impact its beauty. For this project 4 locations were chosen as part of a tour in order to examine the marketing of locations within the city of Brussels. The tour represented a student’s path through Brussels and started with ULB, moved to Place Flagey, then to the touristy Grand Place and finally finished off in Rue de la Fourche. Each location presented a different view of Brussels and had a different meaning for each of the group members. It is through differences in perception and experience that the concept of aesthetics changes.
Seeing how all members of the group were from a diverse background it was decided that it would add an interesting layer to the perception of beauty. However, since all members were students, this element of consistency allowed us to control for certain demographics (age and income) while exploring the impact of other factors on our perception. Through the use of blog entries each student has commented on the aesthetics on each location and has attempted to determine which factors have impacted their decisions. The locations were analyzed through their impact and whether they were seen as aesthetically pleasing or not. Since each place itself is a form of marketing, promoting Brussels as a city the results proved to be as diverse as each location.
When analyzing the aesthetics of ULB it was determined that there was an overall consensus that the campus was unattractive. While this may have been due to a variety of factors the strong indicator was a certain cognitive dissonance felt by members regarding the campus. The grounds and buildings did not meet expectations as it did not match existing preconceived notions. This could have been the result of poor marketing and unrealistic expectations, however, it was more likely due to cultural differences. When people come from different places, it is difficult not to compare aspects from their host country to their home country. In this case it was the comparison of their home school to ULB. According to Festinger (1957) there exists a cognitive dissonance relationship between motivation and desired consequences. Even if a location or expectation is in conflict with another, the resulting dissonance may change after visiting the new location (Liu 2008). So while there may be nothing inherently ugly about the campus because it does not compare to what the members are accustomed to then it is found to be unattractive. The experience of the location in this case did not meet expectations therefore it resulted in negative aesthetics. In this case culture and past experience impacted the perception of beauty.
The next location analyzed was Place Flagey which yielded mixed results among members regarding aesthetics. While there was an agreement in enjoying and appreciating the overall place, the actual aesthetics proved to be more difficult to pinpoint. While some agreed that there were elements that held some inherent beauty such as the ponds, most felt that its beauty stemmed from its usefulness rather its visual components. The mix of historical, practical and cultural elements all seemed to contribute to Place Flagey as a whole. It seemed to trigger some kind of episodic memory for each member of the group. According to Howard (1983) episodic memory refers to a specific product and its associations within the consumer’s mind, including identification, availability and enjoyment. Applying this idea to Place Flagey, the location became much more aesthetically pleasing due to its ability to trigger emotions linked to the group’s episodic memory. Elements become more meaningful and memorable instilling positive feelings which then translate to a positive aesthetic response. Therefore, on its own Place Flagey was not considered initially beautiful however, after further consideration and observation it was concluded that it did indeed hold some sort of collective beauty. It is believed that this is one of the reasons that Place Flagey is constantly frequented.
Another frequented location is the ever popular Grand Place. This location actually proved to be the source of some dispute. While the group agreed that it contained stunningly beautiful architecture some felt the overall experience was tainted by the excess consumerism and hype. The differences in opinion were most likely the result of cultural differences. According to Nisbett and Miyamato (2005) new research suggests that differences in culture which involves partaking in unique social practices can lead to shifts in perception. They further add that as a result of this, perception cannot be seen as consistent across all cultures. This ultimately means that since each member of the group had a diverse cultural background then it is likely that they will perceive variations in beauty when partaking in the social practice of sightseeing. This would account for the discrepancy in opinions. As everyone defines beauty differently it goes without saying that not everyone will feel the same about Grand Place. Whether it’s disdain due to its consumerism or its similarities to other Gothic structures in Europe or appreciation for its the warm, historical charm, the aesthetics of Grand Place are definitely varied.
The final stop on the tour was the area surrounding Rue de la Fourche. Due to its proximity to Grand Place and its propensity for bars and restaurants, this location yielded interesting results. It was agreed that the street did not have any cognitive dissonance associated with it, meaning what you expected you were essentially presented with. There was however, the ever present element of consumerism which did seem to remove some the aesthetic value. According to Venkatesh and Meamber (2006) this could have been the result of everyday-life orientation which involves the consumption of aesthetics in everyday life scenarios. They further argue that according to Lipovetsky (1983) under post-modernist thinking the concept of democratization has resulted in aesthetic encounters being valued the same way as quotidian experiences (Venkatesh&Meanmber 2006). In this case looking for aesthetics while walking through Rue de la Fourche can be seen as the same as just passing through for no real purpose. The occurrence became just another one of many that people experience throughout the day. This is why people can appreciate the usefulness and meaning found within Rue de la Fourche without specifically recognizing it for any outstanding beauty.
After reviewing all of the reasoning behind the perceptions, it was concluded that it was the idea of experience was the most significant factor influencing perception of beauty. Based on preceding ideas, memories, cultural differences and every-day encounters all these factors seemed to effect the perception of beauty in marketing. This goes hand in hand with the idea of post-modern marketing where, it not based solely on the classical ideas rather that marketing is an experience. In order to truly appreciate the aesthetics of marketing one needs to rely on experiences past, present and future. Aesthetics is often very personal and individual and as every individual is gifted with their own set of unique experiences maybe the concept of ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ can stretch even into the concept of aesthetics of marketing.
References
Cova, B (1996).The postmodern explained to managers: implications for marketing. Business Horizons. Nov-Dec 1996
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
Howard, J.A. (1983). Marketing Theory of the Firm.The Journal of Marketing. Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 90-100
Lipovetsky, G. (1983) L’ère du Vide: Essais sur L’individualisme Contemporain. Paris: Gallimard.
Liu, Yi Rui (2008). Expectation Matters: The Effect of Cognitive Dissonance on Self-Esteem, Academic Disengagement, Achievement and Associated Emotion. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong
Nisbett, R.E. &Miyamato, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol. 9, No. 10, pp. 467-473
Venkatesh, A. &Meanmber, L. A. (2006).Arts and aesthetics: Marketing and cultural production.
Marketing Theory Vol. 6, March 2006, pp. 11-39
