Differences in the Meaning of IMC: A Study of Advertising, Public Relations, and Marketing Professionals

Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) has developed into a well-established discipline, shaped by the evolving role of communication technology, which now serves both as a contextual factor and a practical tool in its implementation. This study investigates differences in the interpretation of IMC across three professional groups: marketing, advertising, and public relations. A quantitative, exploratory research design was adopted, employing purposive and quota sampling techniques, with 30 respondents selected from each profession. Data analysis was performed using ANOVA and Tukey tests. The findings indicate no significant differences among the professions regarding IMC as an approach and a business-oriented framework. This shared understanding encompasses internal communication, customer-focused evaluation, and external communication elements such as marketing communication, audience management, dialogue, branding, communication technology, and evaluation. However, notable differences emerged between public relations and advertising compared to marketing in their interpretation of IMC as a strategy and tactic. These differences also extended to aspects such as comprehensive planning, coordination, integration, and synergy of tools and channels, the use of communication technology, and the implementation of two-way communication. Moreover, the differing interpretations included an emphasis on understanding customers, providing them with the freedom to discuss the brand, and ensuring clarity and consistency in brand messaging. Further distinctions were observed between public relations versus advertising and marketing regarding IMC as a management process for channel oversight, as well as the evaluation of IMC's strategic role, brand behavior, and brand loyalty. Finally, all three professions exhibited unique interpretations of IMC as a component of brand equity strategy. Future research is necessary to explore the distinct understanding of IMC by public relations professionals, whose perspectives consistently differ from those in marketing. Such studies could delve deeper into how public relations practitioners conceptualize IMC and its relationship to marketing practices.