From segmentation to fragmentation

From segmentation to fragmentation Markets and marketing strategy in the postmodern era

From segmentation to fragmentation 183

A. Fuat Firat and Clifford J. Shultz II Faculty of Marketing, Arizona State University West, School of Management, Phoenix, USA Introduction There have been several philosophical debates in the history of marketing thought about the discipline’s mission and role within business and society. Among these debates are science versus art, the extent to which the marketing concept should be broadened, and the recent debates on method and philosophy. From them emerged and continue to emerge new directions and challenges for marketing and marketers. Of course, these debates are (were) usually spurred by social forces or evolving business conditions that inspire(d) the need for fresh thinking. One of the most compelling forces today would appear to be the advent of postmodernism. As a new perspective, which has been very effective in the arts and humanities (Foster, 1985; Kaplan, 1987; Stephanson, 1988), as well as in architecture (Jencks, 1987), postmodernism seems likely to make, and by some accounts is already making (Gitlin, 1989; Habermas, 1983; Hutcheon, 1988; Jameson, 1992), an impact on contemporary culture, generally, and consumer culture, specifically. This impact has not been lost on marketing scholars, many of whom have begun to examine postmodernism within the context of their discipline (Brown, 1993a, 1993b; Firat, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993; Firat and Venkatesh, 1993, 1995; Firat et al., 1993, 1994; Ogilvy, 1990; Sherry, 1991; van Raaij, 1993; Venkatesh, 1989, 1992). Moreover, subsumed under the impact of postmodernism across institutions is the belief that postmodernism may also considerably affect the way that marketing organizations will need to conduct business into the next century. Indeed, the modus operandi for marketers in a postmodern era may be “business as unusual”. Consequently, there may be a need for traditional marketing management practitioners to reassess their assumptions about markets and the strategies they use to create competitive advantage and to capture market share. Contributions by marketing scholars have generally focused on the implicit impact of postmodernism on marketing (Brown, 1993a, 1993b; Firat, 1992; van Raaij, 1993), yet our review of the literature led us to conclude that the implications of postmodernism for strategic marketing have received little if any attention from marketing scholars. Our objective, then, is to expand the discussion of postmodernism’s impact on the discipline of marketing and, more

European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 3/4, 1997, pp. 183-207. © MCB University Press, 0309-0566

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 184

specifically, to suggest strategic contingencies for marketing managers and research opportunities for marketing and consumer research scholars. The expanding influence of postmodernism Postmodernism, for a time considered to be a fad by some members of almost all academic disciplines, could prove to be a serious contender as a new perspective from which to view and to act in the world, generally, and the business world, specifically (see Brown, 1993b). This premiss clearly has farreaching implications for marketing managers. Despite its academic and popular adversaries (see Bhaskar, 1991; Eagleton, 1990; Habermas, 1983; Hill, 1993), postmodernist insights and ideas seem to be commanding growing attention and creating serious interest across many disciplines, including architecture (Frampton 1983; Jencks, 1987), art (Levin, 1988; Wallis, 1984), philosophy (Derrida, 1982; Lyotard, 1984; Madison, 1988), literary criticism (Jameson, 1992; Wilson, 1989), women’s studies (Nicholson, 1990) and history (Winders, 1991). Although marketing and consumer research disciplines have been relatively slow to recognize the impacts and existence of postmodernism as compared to sociology (Bauman, 1992), political science (Angus and Jhally, 1989; Aronowitz, 1988), and even the management discipline (Bergquist, 1993), recently postmodernist implications have begun to be explored by marketing scholars (as previously cited). In marketing, these implications may be more than practical, operational, or even theoretical. They may, by some accounts (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995), result in substantial redefinition of the character and the role of the field. For example, an articulation of postmodernist insights for marketing and the consumers of a possibly postmodern era may suggest that some of the most central tenets and/or principles of marketing – e.g. the marketing concept – be re-thought and modified extensively. The purpose of this paper is to explore these practitioner relevant implications, especially as they pertain to segmentation and positioning, two of the most central and strategic concepts in marketing management (Kotler, 1991). Segmentation and positioning have been singled out because they are cornerstones of marketing management, yet emerging trends would suggest traditional conceptions of either may not be as meaningful or satisfactory as once thought, if we hope to understand or explain emerging market conditions. Therefore, marketers may need to develop different conceptions and approaches to segmentation and positioning if they wish to achieve marketing objectives. The aforementioned literature implies the need for transformation(s) in how we view markets. That is, if and when postmodern changes (further) entrench themselves in our societies, no clear or specific recommendations have been promulgated that will enable practitioners to respond to the concomitant marketing challenges. We intend to recommend proactive strategies and frameworks for marketers interested in successfully responding to those challenges. To accomplish this task we shall refer to the framework developed by Firat and Venkatesh (1993), taking into consideration the extensions to this

framework offered by van Raaij (1993) and Brown (1993a, 1993b). These authors have provided insights into the complex and at times confusing discussions on the meaning and domain of postmodernist discourse and culture in order to discern the connections and mutual influences between postmodernism and marketing. In this vein, each paper has proposed several connections between postmodernism and, for example, marketing and advertising practices, which demonstrate the postmodernist tendencies of marketing, especially in recent years. In their framework, Firat and Venkatesh (1993) offer five conditions of postmodern culture: (1) hyperreality; (2) fragmentation; (3) reversal of consumption and production; (4) decentring of the subject; and (5) paradoxical juxtapositions (of opposites) and a general consequence of these conditions – loss of commitment. Van Raaij (1993) adds to these conditions the consequence of openness, which he defines as pluralism; that is, pluralism as the dominant approach to all relationships, or as the acceptance of difference. Brown further expands the framework by articulating three tendencies of the postmodern consumer(s): (1) readiness for living a perpetual present; (2) emphasis on form/style (Brown, 1993b); and (3) greater acceptance of or resignation to (a) state(s) of disorder and chaos (Brown, 1993a). Brief descriptions of these conditions are provided in Table I. The purpose of this paper is not to discuss postmodernism per se since such discussion is available in the aforementioned literature. Instead, we shall try to elaborate points that will help us to provide some further understanding of the transformation mentioned in the title of this paper: “From segmentation to fragmentation”. A recognition of the rudimentary aspects of a transition from modernity to postmodernity will highlight the differences that such a transformation will affect on the constitution of the market. We shall discuss these market implications of the transition throughout the following sections of the paper. We shall also propose, at different points in the paper, marketing strategies that will be required to keep up with or proactively respond to the changes in the market. Foundations of modern marketing thought A brief discussion of the tenets of modern marketing is in order to help a better understanding of the changes required for transition to postmodern marketing strategies. Marketing thought and practice have experienced changes in

From segmentation to fragmentation 185

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 186

Postmodern conditions

Brief descriptions

Openness/tolerance

Acceptance of difference (different styles, ways of being and living) without prejudice or evaluations of superiority and inferiority Constitution of social reality through hype or simulation that is powerfully signified and represented Cultural propensity to experience everything (including the past and future) in the present, “here and now” Cultural propensity to juxtapose anything with anything else, including oppositional, contradictory and essentially unrelated elements Omnipresence of disjointed and disconnected moments and experiences in life and sense of self – and the growing acceptance of the dynamism which leads to fragmentation in markets Growing cultural unwillingness to commit to any single idea, project or grand design Removal of the human being from the central importance she or he held in modern culture – and the increasing acceptance of the potentials of his/her objectfication Cultural acknowledgement that value is created not in production (as posited by modern thought) but in consumption – and the subsequent growth of attention and importance given to consumption Growing influence of form and style (as opposed to content) in determining meaning and life Cultural acknowledgement that rather than order, crises and disequilibria are the common states of existence – and the subsequent acceptance and appreciation of this condition

Hyperreality Perpetual present Paradoxical juxtapositions

Fragmentation

Loss of commitment Decentring of the subject

Reversal of consumption and production

Emphasis on form/style Acceptance of disorder/chaos Table I. Brief description of postmodern conditions

orientations and approaches across history. While present in the practices of certain organizations early in the development of modern business practices (Fullerton, 1988), “modern marketing” thought has not dominated practice until after the Second World War (Kotler, 1972). Modern marketing is distinguishable from other marketing orientations in several aspects, among which is the “marketing concept”. This concept, as articulated by several marketing scholars (e.g. Alderson, 1965; Bagozzi, 1975; Kotler, 1972; Kotler and Levy, 1969; Levy and Zaltman, 1975) captures many of the more essential characteristics of modern marketing; characteristics which reflect its indebtedness to tenets of modernism in general. Modern thought put the subject (human being) at the centre and elaborated the project of modernity in terms of the relationships this subject develops with the objects he or she acts on in order to improve conditions of life. The totality of these subject-object relations constitute the economy, and the rationality of

managing these relations is the substance of economics. It could be claimed, therefore, that the economy and its science, economics, had to take “centre stage” in modern society. In fact, it would be difficult to argue the contrary; that the economy does not constitute the major interest in modern society. The dominant train of thought throughout modern history has been that if the economy is not healthy, nothing else can survive. Marketing and the marketing concept tend to be products of this modernist focus on the economy. The success of the marketing organization is contingent on the acceptance of its products in the market and to the resolution of the product offering in a market exchange (in a transaction involving economic resources). Marketing textbooks (see Bagozzi, 1986; Kotler, 1991; Park and Zaltman, 1987; Stanton, 1975) usually indicate that the final purpose of marketing practice is to maximize in the long-term (or optimize) such exchanges, or sales, and thereby, profits. While the social reason for being (raison d’être/justification of existence) is professed to be the satisfaction of consumer needs, existence is proclaimed to be possible only through economic/financial success in a competitive environment. Given that the whole society’s existence depends on economic health, economically rational behaviour becomes central to the operation of any institution or entity, and the focal importance of the health of the economy above all else (including, some critics would contend (Evernden, 1989; Henion, 1976), human, animal and plant life) is reaffirmed in the individual behaviours of marketing organizations. Social and political order comes to be perceived as dependent on a healthy economic order (Schmookler, 1992). Each marketing organization reflects this order in its own operations. One major reflection is in the centrality of the product and each product’s contribution to the success of the organization, since, in modernism, economic value is represented in and by the benefits inherent to the uses of the product. In other words, value is a property of the product; it is “[t]he total utility which is yielded by the object in question” (Bannock et al., 1978). The marketing organization realizes or actualizes economic value through its products. One reason for the centrality of the product is that modern marketing presupposes that value for the consumer is materialized in the prescribed benefits of product attributes being offered, and that it is this value which results in consumer satisfaction. Postmodernists would suggest that all of the above assertions are suspect, as we shall discuss. The above premisses are also reflected on the conceptualizations of the consumer in modern thought. The consumer, as the subject at the centre of the modernist project, is an individual with a mind that can be independent from the natural, sensational (emotional) limitations and weaknesses of the body (Rorty, 1979). As such a subject, the consumer is not only conceptualized to be the centre of the modernist project (i.e., improving human lives by controlling nature through scientific technologies), but also to be very centred, selfconscious, and committed to a reasoned and reasonable goal or end. Consequently, modern marketing thought tends to hold that a unity (in some

From segmentation to fragmentation 187

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 188

arguments, authenticity) of self or self-concept, a sense of one’s identity and character, can and does exist. The consumer, then, armed with such a united concept of self and a commitment to it (many times represented in a personal quest) strives for the satisfaction of (clearly) identified needs for this self. Such unity of purpose, character and self logically suggests a stability in the consumer’s orientations and behaviour. This allows segmentation into relatively homogeneous behaviour/need/orientation groups, or the more recent types (as in the VALS typology) possible and useful as a marketing principle and tool. Postmodern impacts on marketing Openness/tolerance Postmodernists have argued that many of the modernist premisses, including those which shaped modern marketing thought, are based on myths, in the same vein that any social existence is (Campbell, 1990). The postmodernist position is generally that since all social experience is founded on a narrative – that is, a story constructed by a social group about life, its conditions, and its requirements – in which a community believes and, by acting upon such belief, transforms it into the social reality it experiences, no narrative ought to have a privileged status. Postmodernism, therefore, is open to and tolerant of all narratives, even including the modernist ones, as long as they tolerate other narratives also. They do, however, challenge and object to, especially, two aspects of modern narratives: the modernist assumption that a social reality independent of a socially constructed one (or of human agency) exists; and the modernist claim to having the only true way of objectively knowing and, therefore, accurately representing this reality thanks to traditional methods of scientific enquiry. These aspects suggest that knowledge and understanding can only be determined by a given set of prescribed orientations and methods, however imperfect, whereas for the postmodernist – as for Mill (1859/1978) or Nietzsche (1954) – richer insights may be provided by knowing that the imperfections of one’s methods limit how much one may ever know. Postmodernist thought especially challenges these narratives because, perceiving such a unique quality in themselves, the modernist narratives suggest superiority to all others and tend to reject all others as irrational, insensible, unrealistic, utopian, and even as fantasy and palmistry. Unfortunately for those who would wish to benefit from postmodernist insights, there may seem to be an incommensurate ontological schism between modernist and postmodernist positions. As opposed to the knowing subject of modernity, postmodernism conceptualizes the consumer as the communicating subject, one who actively communicates the social reality she or he prefers to live rather than passively inheriting one constructed without his/her participation. Marketing in a postmodern culture, therefore, has to be open to and tolerant of the non-traditional demands communicated by consumers, including those of interference into organizational cultures.

Hyperreality and perpetual present The disillusionments with the modernist project have given rise to many diverse movements, especially in the most modern societies of the world, which seem to have eroded the commitment to modernity. One result of the erosion of commitment to modernity is an increasing tendency and willingness on the part of the members of society to seek the “simulated reality” rather than an extant reality, imposing and immutable (Baudrillard, 1983; Eco, 1986; Postman, 1985). There are many indications of this tendency that have an impact on marketing. One is the transformation of our urban centres into theme parks (Sorkin, 1993). Indeed, the city, itself, the reality that much of modern society experiences in everyday life, is a simulation completely constructed by the human imagination (Gottdiener and Lagopoulos, 1986). Yet, increasingly, we find different sections of our cities replicating/reflecting different thematic constructions. In Beverly Hills, California, for example, one finds Rodeo Drive (named “Via Rodeo”), a very well-known part of this well-known town, representing a theme from Rome. The shopping malls, most imposing parts of our (sub)urban experience, of course, are theme parks in their own right. The Borgata in Scottsdale, Arizona, which replicates a Renaissance Italian town, or the Raffles Center in Singapore, the Circular Quay in Sydney, Australia, represent good examples of this thematization of these important landmarks of our time, where, possibly, outside their homes and work places, (sub)urban populations may be spending the largest portions of their time. Clearly, however, shopping malls do not stand alone as theme parks. Thematization is well integrated into work areas, park areas, wharf areas, etc. In this sense, markets are increasingly de(re)constructed by thematizing marketers in conjunction with the consumers who seek the simulated experiences that enhance and re-enchant their present encounters with(in) life. For postmodernist observers of contemporary culture, these environments represent a nostalgia on the part of contemporary urban populations for experiencing what, in the imagination, once was or could have been. This is a partly disinterested nostalgia, however, not a wish to be indeed transported totally into such a time or existence, but only voyeuristically to experience it for the moment that it excites and titillates the senses. Furthermore, this interest is not solely for what could have been in the past but also in the future. It is the representation of an imagined past or future in the present, and the present is the period on to which postmodernism turns its gaze. Premodern culture focused on the past, the modern culture on the future. The focus in postmodernism is: right here, right now. But this immediacy does not have to stabilize, become uniform and boring. The postmodern consumer wants to experience the diversity of many themes, past and future, not get fixed in any single one. The hyperreal – reality based on simulation (Baudrillard, 1993; Eco, 1986) – allows the realization of this wish. The touristic consumer samples the many sights, sounds, themes and tastes of yesterday and tomorrow – which are all now and here, in the present (Gitlin, 1989) – immersing themself into the

From segmentation to fragmentation 189

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 190

experiences and moving among them to experience each for a moment, as long as it keeps its appeal. The postmodern consumer seeks those experiences that can make “present” all or most of the exciting elements of space/time settings without the difficulties and hardships. This postmodern claim seems to find support in the interest that consumers display for the IMAX Theatre at the Grand Canyon where they can really experience the canyon in all its (historic) grandeur without the trekking, the heat or the cold, and the possibility of missing many sights. The interest in simulation seems to be evident in the fact that visitors to the cloud forest in Costa Rica have to be shown in slide shows all that they will miss when hiking the forest. It is evident in the numbers of tourists who visit EPCOT Center’s World Showcase in Disney World, Orlando, Florida, from around the world to experience Paris and London and Italy and Morocco, etc. It is evident in the interest in the volcano in front of The Mirage Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, the safari at Fossil Rim Park in Texas, and the San Francisco earthquake showcase on Pier 39 in San Francisco. Each place is one where consumers go to have sensational experiences without the dangers involved. Finally, it is very evident in the extraordinary interest exhibited in all media for the coming advent of virtual reality and/or integrative communication technologies that will allow simulated presence and sharing of virtual spaces by people actually far away from each other (Bylinsky, 1991; Daily News Tribune, 1990). The success of the marketing examples above indicate the greater attention marketing organizations have to give to the hyperreal and its representation in the present. Fragmentation and loss of commitment Rather than suppress fragmentation or try to find unifying themes to resolve it, postmodernism calls for an unabashed practice of it. Recognition of the above discussed interest among the consumers of, especially, contemporary market economies in experiencing the different simulated existences, and an interpretation of human history in terms of socially constructed realities, lends validity to making such a call. This is a call for a tolerance towards different ways of being, life styles and realities. The postmodern sensibility even encourages the experiencing of many different ways of being, not conforming or committing only to a single one. Such a stance clearly allows for an expansion of fragmentation, of fragmented moments of experience and existence in a lifetime. Since contemporary consumers find commitment to a single project or metanarrative across modernity to have brought little promise but much misery, they have an affinity to not commit or conform to any unified, consistent, centred field, idea, system, or narrative (Jay, 1986; Lyotard; 1992; Wilson, 1989), or “regime of truth” (Foucalt, 1980). Fragmentation seems to be omnipresent in the everyday lives of modern consumers. Indeed, to the postmodern observer, fragmentations abound in everyday life experiences. They dominate the media, the most important and omnipresent mode of exposure to our universe in contemporary society. Fragmentation in the medium of television permeates advertisements, music videos, situation

comedies and other programmes. Advertisements and music videos, increasingly resembling each other, are collages of fleeting moments that excite the senses, yet rarely connect to a central, unified theme or focus. Consider the “Just do it” Nike advertisements. The purpose of the collage is to leave the consumer not with a centred idea or cognition but with an overall image, an image that is, itself, not linked to the fragmented images in the collage, but triggered by their impact on the senses. The programmes on television or the most popular films from the movie establishments are not really that different. Each is made up of largely independent but highly exciting, short, fleeting segments that stand on their own through their spectacular qualities, whether technical, artistic or stylistic. While in modern film, for example, each scene was constructed to contribute to the narration of a story line, as postmodern trends diffuse in the film industry, films increasingly concentrate on the spectacle with inconsequential story lines that enable the spectacular scenes that can be created through technique and style (Marchetti, 1989). Similar fragmentation is also experienced in the spoken or printed vignettes on the radio or in newspapers and magazines, as well as in the highlighted brand names that flash by on billboards to reinforce the experiences on television and films. The fragmentation in everyday life experiences and the loss of commitment to any single way of being result in “bricolage” markets, that is consumers who do not present a united, centred self and, therefore, set of preferences, but instead a jigsaw collage of multiple representations of selves and preferences even when approaching the same product category. The market is increasingly constituted of individual consumers who, for example, express preference for punk, grunge, conservative and preppy clothing styles simultaneously (Lacayo, 1994; Tully, 1994). In effect, the market may be constituted of tribes which allow greater freedom of movement within and among them than did any class, sub-culture or segment (Cova, 1995). Paradoxical juxtapositions As well as fragmented from each other, postmodernists would argue that these fleeting spectacles are also fragmented from any context (Gitlin, 1989). They do not belong within a specific context or history. “Anything can be juxtaposed to anything else. Everything takes place in the present, ‘here,’ that is, nowhere in particular”(Gitlin, 1989, p. 350). On television, as well as in other media that dominate much of our lives, we see programmes, including news programmes, where events, scenes and personalities are often superimposed and juxtaposed on to each other from completely independent and disconnected contexts. Such fragmentation from contexts in our media surrounding and informing us reinforces, for the modernist critic, a failure on the part of the young postmodern generation to connect to history and other worldly events around them (American Broadcasting Corporation, 1988). For the postmodern generation that extends from Berlin, to Bangkok, to Boston and that is perhaps best represented by the MTV generation, Generation X, and the Boom Busters – well over 100 million consumers between the ages of 15 and 29 (see Business

From segmentation to fragmentation 191

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 192

Week, 1992; Tully, 1994) – this is an alternative form of being and, ultimately, consumption; one that liberates from more modernist pressures to conform to the status quo. Such postmodern existence is reinforced by another set of fragmentations; that of the signifier from the signified, the object from the function, and the product from the need. That all signifiers are only arbitrarily linked to the signified (and the referent) has been well recognized by semioticians at least since Saussure and Pierce (Eco and Thomas, 1983; Santambrogio and Violi, 1988). The link is only pragmatic, that is, culturally, linguistically imposed. As in the case of marketing campaigns, the “free-floating” signifiers can be gainfully employed in (re)signification. They can be constantly imbued with novel or nostalgic or reinforced meanings to represent a multiplicity of ideas, things and positions. As in the case of the fissure between the signifier and the signified, so is there one between the object and its function. All objects, including those specifically produced for a particular function, are, nevertheless, only arbitrarily connected to that function. Imagine, for example, the number of different uses a child or even an adult not acculturated to a Western kitchen could find for a kitchen implement, such as a mixer. This freedom of objects from their intended functional uses was well recognized by surrealist and other artists, such as Duchamp et al., who turned utilitarian objects (toilet seats, meat grinders, CocaCola bottles) into icons and art pieces in their own right. Finally, given a postmodern analysis, the product acquired in the market is independent of the need(s) for which the consumer initially sought it and the producer provided it. This, of course, is just an extension of the separation of the object from its original function. In effect, the consumer acquires the product for the image that it represents, and this image is only partially, if at all, constructed on the basis of a functional need. Furthermore, a single product is capable of representing multiple images, as signified by culture and by the marketing effort. Consequently, the disconnectedness of images and products from each other, from their original contents and from their contexts, is complete. Decentring, consumption/production reversal, and the emergence of the Homo consumericus The fragmentations discussed certainly reflect on the everyday life and being of the consumer. Marketing’s growing influence and role in human life, in terms of an increasing, almost complete, domination of life by the products purchased in the market, renders the consumer’s life a series of fragmented self-definitions determined by consumption. In consuming each product, as the consumer eats a frozen dinner, watches television, feeds the cat, washes dirty clothes in the clothes washer, they are involved in an independent, separate task which is only connected in the culture’s imaginary narratives of purpose regarding a healthy life, a long life, an enjoyable life, a free life, etc. The consumer is no longer defined by the cost/benefit assessments of choices, but by the experiences

acquired through consumption. Yet these are indeed narratives through which consumers seem to seek a central, unified meaning and purpose for a life that is increasingly fragmented into moments dominated by tasks required by products consumed. In effect, these are modernist narratives, products of the modernist imaginary (Kellner, 1989). Conversely, postmodern consumers are said to be transcending these narratives, no longer seeking centred, unified characters, but increasingly seeking to feel good in separate, different moments by acquiring self-images that make them marketable, likeable, and/or desirable in each situation or moment. As a result, one finds a growing playfulness with the game of simulating and switching images to make the best of each situation in which the consumer finds themself (Ewen, 1988; Kaplan, 1987; Moyers, 1989). In short, modernist Homo sapiens evolved into Homo economicus, a creature defined by time and resource allocations, costs and benefits. The postmodern individual has evolved into Homo consumericus, a creature defined by consumption and the experiences derived therefrom. Thus occurs the fragmentation of the self. In postmodern culture, the self is not consistent, authentic or centred (Gergen, 1991; Laing, 1969). Postmodernists will argue that it never was, in its core, or in tendency, but that in modernity the illusion of such a self was sanctified and, therefore, sought. The postmodern generation has transcended this quest and neither seeks it nor feels a guilt in not seeking it. On the contrary, this ability to switch images and represent different selves by switching products that represent the images – allowing oneself to lay claim to powerful successful images – is considered as a liberation as freedom from monotony, boredom and the necessity to conform. Many consumers, for example, find energy, excitement and fun in playing personalities through “look-alike” parties, contests and life styles (Moyers, 1989). On the other hand, in societies where modern culture and rhetoric are still strong, the experience of seeking such image and personality switching, such endless array of situations necessitating variations, seems to create, in some individuals, a counter-seeking of conformity and belonging to permanent and tightly-knit groups, such as cults and gangs, or clubs and other groups of various sizes that require conformity based on an array of agendas. In a market exchange economy, all these self-images are represented through the products acquired in the market and, thus, the market becomes the locus of realizing the fragmented self, the fragmented moments of feeling good. The market is, itself, fragmented, since it appears to have no central, unified agenda. It is construed of many consumers and products, and all relationships in the market are truly momentary; each transaction requiring no deep commitment on the part of the consumer. Indeed, the consumer can do a trial purchase, as long as the buying power is present, and drop the product, or use it momentarily as required in representing an image in one situation, then move to another, with other products. The moments of involvement in the market are, thereby, fragmented. Yet, in contemporary times where the market mentality is so pervasive, the consumer seeks self-images to be marketable – that is, to be

From segmentation to fragmentation 193

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 194

represented in a social or economic market – and these marketable self-images are represented through acquisition of products in the market. In this sense, the market and its fragmentation become the centre of all activity and the medium through which all is signified and represented without the appearance of any unified purpose, ideology, or narrative. This may indicate, contrary to the postmodernist claims that all meta-narratives have come to an end, the existence, at this juncture of the postmodern, of a new meta-narrative that is not recognizable with the modernist categories and constructs that historically enabled the perception of existence of a meta-narrative. Fragmentation, itself, and its medium, the market, constitute, in fact, this new meta-narrative. The deliberate practice of the market, marketing, then becomes the culture of contemporary life. For consumers to fulfil their desires, marketing organizations will need to empower the consumers to become marketers of (self) images themselves. Emphasis on form/style The fragmentation, the dynamic of continuous communication of new images and imaginaries through creative signification and representation of “freefloating” signifiers subsequently necessitates that each communicative moment be independently exciting. In the culture of disjointed images (re)presented in collages the possibility of substantive linkages among and within communicative moments is greatly eliminated and an increasing sophistication in form and style, where technique and pace gain utmost importance, is necessitated. The communicating, touristic, customizer markets (consumers), and the marketers, rely on the form and the style of their communicative messages (whether it be in verbal, visual, sonic or other media) to address and represent their content. Form becomes content in remaining the only way to represent it (Ewen, 1988). Concurrently, the markets become image rather than brand markets, remaining loyal to brand names only as long as they maintain fresh and up-to-date images – a circumstance experienced by brand names such as Brylcreem, Ovaltine and Lifebuoy (Elliott, 1993). In effect, the markets are fluid, constantly ready to switch and re-switch, constantly ready to try several or many images, brands and products, both sequentially and simultaneously. This is, by no means, a senseless “try anything” movement, however. The image must be right – it must be the image sought – whether in terms of quality and value, or in terms of expressing the consumer’s own momentary image. Marketers “better get things right, especially when it comes to cultural icons” (Steinhauer, 1994). Acceptance of disorder/chaos The ability to move among the fragmented moments and experiences heightens the scepticism among contemporary consumers that a single order is present or necessary. Rather, the consumer generally takes the existence of disorder and chaos as the norm with the cognizance that different orders, even if temporary and momentary, is to be constructed through signifying actions and

negotiations with others and with the objects. The markets, therefore, have to be considered as fluid and not stable. In the postmodernist sensibility, chaos and disorder are not to be feared but to be critically played with. Increasing numbers of consumers seem to have lost their trust in the industrial, technological order which promised brighter and improved futures but largely failed to provide it for large majorities of the world’s population – although the successes in medical technologies cannot be denied, they are considered to have benefited small minorities around the world – instead creating much pollution, misery, loss of responsibility, depletion of the Earth’s resources, extinction of species, and possibilities of immense destruction (Baudrillard, 1987; Chomsky, 1989; Kellner, 1990; Postman, 1985) Therefore, marketing strategies that will provide the possibilities for critical play with chaos and disorder will empower the contemporary consumers, give them greater control over the order(s) they wish to see in their lives, and bring success to the marketing organization. Marketing in postmodern culture In a culture of fragmentation where consumers are neither committed to nor captivated by a single narrative, state of being, or self, and where they assert their existence through the power of the images they represent (Moyers, 1989), marketing indeed becomes the cultural sensibility. Both the spectacles, now representing attractive images and vying for consumers’ momentary experiences, and the consumers themselves, representing images that make them attractive in different moments, have to acquire the marketing acumen. In an environment where there is increasingly less commitment to any one spectacle, product, brand, but only a momentary attachment – so long as the image represented is seductive, as experienced by several brands that enjoyed high popularity for a period, such as LA Gear and, to a certain extent, Lacoste – a continual (re)production, (re)formulation, (re)positioning and (re)generation of images (image marketing) is necessitated. In a system of fragmented narratives where none has power beyond the image that it represents through signifying the elements of the bricolage it offers, success is only possible through a marketing sensibility that recognizes the linguistic, symbolic and communicative aspects of signifiers to employ and (re)signify them in ways that represent spectacular images. Any signifier (including the Homo consumericus) that cannot achieve this tends to be lost in the market, now the only medium of existence. The postmodern consumer, therefore, recognizes that they are not just a consumer, but a customizer and a producer of (self-)images at each consumptive moment (Firat et al., 1995). Marketing with a postmodern perspective must no longer conceptualize any consumer unit as a point of conclusion (the end user), but as a moment in the continual cycle of (re)production. And, since this consumer is no longer representing a centred, unified, consistent, single selfimage, but a fragmented and fluid set of self-images, conceptualizing the consumer as a member of a relatively homogeneous market segment is

From segmentation to fragmentation 195

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 196

increasingly difficult. Rather, marketers will have to revisualize the market as a set of fragments, as we shall discuss. Already, marketing organizations are realizing that they may be encountering segments of one (Blattberg and Deighton, 1991). That is, as consumers are starting to seek unique self-images and computer technologies are allowing, in some cases, personalized production of products, the segments are breaking up into individual customers. An example is the advent of personalized greeting cards. While modernity created mass-production of greeting cards with their specialized messages for different segments and occasions, computerization now allows personalized messages, yet still on mass-produced cards. The personalization of the cards themselves is also likely to follow soon, since technology allows it and fragmentation demands it. This forces the greeting card company to transform from one of manufacturing and marketing greeting cards (a product) to one of marketing a process whereby consumers can, themselves, produce cards. In Japan, some marketers of kitchens are using virtual reality technology to allow the future owners of kitchens to participate in the designing of their kitchens (Bylinski, 1991). The customer is increasingly becoming the customizer (McKenna, 1988; Moyers, 1989). Such transformation is likely to affect many, if not most, marketing organizations, especially since it enables consumers to construct different versions of products that in their imagination best represent the images they wish to create when marketing themselves. Furthermore, given fragmentation, marketing techniques which allow consumers to construct different styles, forms, types and versions of the same product for use in representing different self-images in different situations (spectacle marketing) are likely to become necessary. This may most likely require the greatest ingenuity and creativity on the part of organizations that market high-price durable products. Marketing strategy in fragmented markets Fragmented markets are likely to render segmentation strategies and techniques founded on the more traditional bases of segmentation, such as demographics and psychographics, and even the more recent typologies (for example, VALS typology (Mitchell, 1984)) less and less useful. Such strategies depended on the modern premisses, discussed earlier in the paper, regarding, for example, a consistent, centred and unified character or self-concept for the consumer. The consumer was conceptualized as a subject, a human being who was qualitatively different from objects and who acted on and through objects to realize superordinate goals for life. Ability to act on and manipulate objects to fulfil the goal in the future afforded this consumer their power. The postmodern consumer is conceptualized (and conceptualizes themself) in a substantially different way, as a product which asserts its power through objectification, (re)presenting an image, thereby, the ability to seduce (Baudrillard, 1990) in order to achieve a position that makes one marketable in the present, in each moment of exposure. For postmodern consumer markets,

using segmentation strategies that try to constrain or anchor consumers to a single, consistent, stable way of behaving is likely to lead to marketing failure. Fragmented markets and fragmented experiences signal both the increasing possibility – and maybe necessity – and the growing consumer desire for fluid movements among different experiences, images and meanings in and through life. As a result, the offerings of marketing organizations that have greater sensitivity to changes in the market and the desires of contemporary consumers exhibit the postmodern characteristics discussed above. We are witnessing the success of those marketers who provide consumers with products that help projection of (self-)images and, especially, of those marketers who offer consumers (con)texts within which consumers can have experiences and experiment with (self-)images different from those required by the roles they played in modern society. Las Vegas, which Time Magazine declared as the “New All American City” (Anderson, 1994), a city that has flourished even during times of general economic stagnation in the USA, and a city that many postmodernists consider as the prototype postmodern space, is a case in point. It is increasingly being constructed as a city of themes and is no longer simply a gambling town. The themes offered to the consumers, such as Ancient Egypt (Luxor Hotel), Roman Empire (Ceasar’s Palace Hotel), or pirate land (Treasure Island Hotel), present such (con)textual experiences and represent experiments toward postmodern marketing. We must assess these experiments, along with those of Disney, Universal Studios, Nike Town, Legoland and others as examples of early (or immature) postmodern marketing, however. While they allow consumers different experiences and possibilities of playing with (self) images, they are highly commercial and predetermined offerings not leaving much scope for the consumer to participate in their design and construction. A more mature postmodern marketing practice will empower consumers for greater participation in such play and construction of experiences, images and meanings. An example of relatively more mature postmodern marketing may be presented by the Electronic Café International experiment (Galloway and Rabinowitz, 1989). Started by two artists in Santa Monica, California, electronic cafés – now about 50 exist around the world – provide an environment in which consumers from all walks of life can experiment with new integrative information and communication technologies, including virtual reality and hypermedia technologies, in order to try out and construct experiences they feel may be maningful. As already mentioned, mature postmodern marketing strategies will be those that empower the consumers to become partners with marketing organizations as influential participants in the construction of experience(s) and (self-)images when and if they choose. Currently, as we have tried to express, such constructions are greatly dependent on the market and on the ability to make the images and offerings marketable. This is due to the growing influence of the market globally. However, the meanings and the difference that the consumers are seeking to construct in their lives may come to be considered to be restrained and limited

From segmentation to fragmentation 197

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 198

by the necessities of making them marketable. Postmodern marketers, therefore, need to be alert and ready to respond to significant qualitative transformations in the very nature of the market itself. Is it at all possible to plan and develop marketing strategies in an environment of fragmented and fluid spectacles, images and lives? How does any marketer, including the consumer, market their products themself and know which images will attract? The purpose of the remainder of this paper is to propose some answers to these questions in order to alert opinion leaders and innovators in the field of marketing to the possible opportunities and pitfalls in a possibly increasingly postmodern global market. Image is the product While modernist meta-narratives declared that value was a property of the product and that the image represented this value, as we discussed earlier in the paper, the postmodernist insights regarding the simulation and the symbolic tend to lead to a claim that the relationship between the product and the image are reversed. Marketing practitioners have known for a long time that, in many instances, the product’s image determines whether an exchange is consummated. The consumer purchases a product to realize the value that they perceive in the image. For marketing to be successful, therefore, the product must represent the image well; otherwise the consumer will be disappointed. Thus, value is the property of the image, it is the image that the consumer seeks, especially at a time when the principal goal of the Homo consumericus is to (re)produce and (re)present oneself as an image. Marketers need to think in terms of (re)producing images and of then constructing products that represent the images. That is, they must think in terms of products representing the images, not images representing the products. In concordance with the increasing importance of the symbolic and the image over the functional (specifically, utilitarian functions) and the material, the images that the consumers seek in objects (products) are likely to increasingly emphasize the symbolic aspects. That is, the image of the object is likely to be increasingly dependent not on the (utilitarian) functions it serves but on its contributions to self-image and its contributions to happiness (or feeling good). Consequently, there is a need to pay greater attention to the tacit and the visceral, especially to the feelings of the consumers. How consumers feel, therefore, is going to play an increasingly important role among who they are (demographics), what they do (activities and interests, life styles), what they think (opinions and beliefs), and what they value (values and attitudes), aspects of consumer behaviour that have been more heavily researched in modern marketing. Researchers can expect to find feelings to be more fluid or fickle than the other variables, that is changing more often and rather substantially as the consumers move from one situation or life sphere to another. We are defining life spheres as the domains within which an individual performs, usually at different moments of their life. These spheres are, generally, culturally considered or perceived to be relatively separate from each other in that the

individual rarely transports the roles he or she plays in one sphere into another. In contemporary society, such life spheres within which consumers will most likely seek different images include, but are not limited to, the work sphere, the domestic sphere and the recreational sphere. It is imporant to recognize that since the spheres are culturally constructed and bound, they are dynamic and in rather constant (re)definition.

From segmentation to fragmentation 199

Fragmented images If the arguments of the postmodernist scholars are correct, it will be rather futile to try to find consistent, centred, or stable self-images in postmodern markets. Rather, within each life sphere there will be several self-images that a single consumer may subscribe to at different times, under different circumstances. Therefore, in postmodern markets the marketer’s purpose will increasingly be to understand the elements of the types of images represented in Figure 1, for example, in order to try to provide processes for the consumers to immerse themselves into and find the elements that they seek in (re)presenting and (re)producing their self-images. It is possible that research will expose the existence of greater affinity among certain images in different life spheres, as illustrated by three such spheres in Figure 2. There may be found, therefore, some image clusters within and across life spheres. While it is unlikely to expect any single postmodern consumer to adhere to any single image within the life spheres (due to the aforementioned fragmentations), there may be higher propensities to switch among certain images that belong to the same clusters (due to the image clusters). Any image cluster should be considered rather temporary and transitory, however, given the characteristics of postmodern markets. Furthermore, it may be reasonable to expect that the life spheres that seem to be so clearly defined and different at present – that is, work life, domestic life, and life outside the home spent for recreation and leisure, for example, are currently rather well delineated from each other – will begin to merge, either creating new configurations of life spheres or a life that is not differentiable into distinct spheres, but completely fragmented into dispersed moments.

Figure 1. Constitution of images

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 200

Figure 2. Fragmented images in life spheres

Merging of the consumer and the producer (organization) Based on our discussion of the developments observed in postmodern culture(s), we have already tried to illustrate the increasing propensity of the consumer to act as a producer. This propensity seems to occur along two dimensions: the Homo consumericus perceives themself as a product to be (re)presented in market(s), and participates in the market to (re)produce their marketable self-image(s); and they increasingly become a partner in the process of production of the products that they use in (re)producing their self-images. Both dimensions indicate a merging of the consumer and the producer since at each instance of activity there is, simultaneously, both consumption and production occurring – as the individual consumes products she or he finds in the market, for example, they are (re)producing their self, both physically and mentally. At each moment, whether there is a clear and conscious intention on the part of the individual or not, consumption also produces the self-images.

Given the postmodernist insights, therefore, consumption and production are inseparable, contrary to the modernist contentions and efforts to define these two moments separately (Mill, 1967/1836; Say, 1964/1821). Coincidentally, the consumer is also a producer at each moment. Postmodernist insights may alert us to the fact that, while culturally we may wish to make a distinction between the two (i.e. consumption and production, consumer and producer) to help us order things in our own minds, any distinction is only arbitrary. The cultural recognition of such identity of consumption and production, consumer and producer, and the technological advancements in the computer/information field which allow greater customization in organized production, may be the impetus behind the greater participation of the individual in the process of production, not as an employee of the producing organization but as its customer/partner. We mentioned above the examples of personalized greeting cards and virtual reality kitchens whereby the customer participates in the process of finalization of certain features of the product that they will eventually possess and use. Clearly, such offerings of process instead of a product are at their early stages. Yet, if we were to carry this trend to its logical end, it represents a merging of the customer and the organization, where the customer becomes a complete partner in the production process(es) of the organization(s). While, currently, this may seem far in the future, it also seems to be an increasingly inevitable trend for many product categories and services. The implications of postmodern conditions for the market and for marketing strategies discussed above are summarized in Table II. Future research Certainly, social trends and the emergence of Homo consumericus would suggest the mutually evolving concepts of marketing and postmodernism, i.e. postmodern marketing, warrant further research. We believe the most compelling research would investigate the developments in the market and the corresponding marketing responses to these developments. To a large extent, this paper discussed the developments that are taking place in contemporary markets as a result of the postmodern trends by utilizing the insights from mostly postmodernist observers of the qualitative changes that are occurring. One of the central conclusions from the discussions was that the realm of images is increasingly asserting its dominance, both in terms of what consumers seek and in terms of determining what value(s) the products in the market will eventually represent. Thus, one major area of research required is: • How the images – that at a certain time tend to be especially preferred within different life spheres or dispersed moments – are constructed. And similarly, how the level of participation by individual consumers, marketing organizations, and other cultural institutions in the process of signification and representation of these images interact presently and interact over time.

From segmentation to fragmentation 201

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4

Postmodern condition

Market implications

Marketing strategies

Openness/tolerance

Communicating (rather than knowing) markets

Flexible marketing Adaptive marketing

Hyperreality

Constructed (rather than given) markets

Thematization Simulation

Perpetual present

Consumer preference for simulations “Here-and-now” markets

Immersion

Paradoxical juxtapositions Fragmentation Loss of commitment

Bricolage markets Fragmented markets “Touristic” markets

Image fragmentation Image clustering Spectacle marketing

Decentring of the subject

Consumers with fragmented selves

Continual image (re)generation

Reversal of consumption and production

Customizer markets Producer markets

Market de (re)construction Process marketing

Emphasis on form/style

Image (rather than brand) markets

Image (versus brand marketing)

202

Table II. Implications of postmodern conditons for market and marketing strategies

Acceptance of disorder/chaos Fluid markets Empowerment marketing Note: Concepts are positioned in the table for reasons of parsimony and clarity; readers should understand that while we intentionally denote some specific relationships in the table, in fact the concepts, as discussed in the text, are very dynamic and each is related to and impacts all the others

Another important conclusion from the discussions provided in this paper is that the consumers are in the market to produce themselves, specifically, their self-images which will make them successful, that is, attractive and marketable, in the different situations (which are unfolding increasingly as market relations) that they encounter in every sphere of their lives. Therefore, a second important area of research is: • How the consumers select the different images to represent in different situations. (What is the degree of contribution from the elements depicted in Figure 1 in the preference of the images selected?) The situations for which the consumers customize themselves as marketable images are increasingly fragmented as we have already illustrated. Consequently, the individuals are representing not singular images but multiple images fashioned for the many occasions that each individual encounters. As producers of self-images, the consumers need to manage this multiplicity and

fragmentation. This, as discussed, may be achieved through some clustering of images. Thus, another area of research needed is: • How the image clusters form, transform and reform. (What are the major factors that play a role in these transformation processes?) Our earlier discussions indicate that, as a result of the changes in the nature of the consumer and the market, important changes are also taking place in the nature of the product and marketing. We elaborated the transformation from product to process in the marketing organization’s offering. Currently, marketing organizations are largely oriented towards providing finished products for their customers. Thus, a much-needed research area is: • How to identify, cope with, and manage the differences during the times of change from marketing a product to marketing a process. As processes are offered to customers to enable them to participate in the designing of the final product in order to customize the products to the images sought by the consumers, the marketing organizations will be responsible for making these processes friendly and approachable and thus attractive to their customers. This is a new area of expertise and it requires research into: • How the participation of the consumers in the processes for customization of products to represent preferred images are or can be enhanced and made more effective. Finally, all the transformations discussed above point to substantive and qualitative changes in what marketing is and will become. Beyond the different, specific research needs listed above, a much more general and conceptual, as well as practice-oriented rethinking of the role of marketing, indeed of its identity, its definition, will be necessary. Therefore, as the merging of the customer and the organization becomes increasingly complete, important avenues of research will involve: • How to reconceptualize and practise marketing; positioning, pricing, distribution, promotion (information and conversation) and product (process). • How to develop new marketing strategies based on these reconceptualizations. • How to operationalize the role of marketing in order to avail it to all marketers, including, specifically, the Homo consumericus. Conclusion That the world is presently undergoing extraordinary change can hardly be debated. Moreover, this change seems to be affecting all people and institutions. However, the appropriate way to make sense of it, to explain it in such a way that marketers can seize opportunities that emanate from this phenomenal change, is the source of frequent and sometimes divisive debate. The purpose of this paper has been to provide an objective overview of the emergence of a social

From segmentation to fragmentation 203

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 204

phenomenon, postmodernism, and to discuss the impacts this phenomenon may have on the marketing discipline, especially strategic contingencies for marketing managers and research opportunities for marketing and consumer research scholars. We submit that postmodernism, so influential in other disciplines, has the potential to reframe our thinking about social trends and business practices in an increasingly global, but fragmented marketplace, and thus to give marketing managers insights that, in turn, can abet strategic decision making. Finally, we suggest that a better understanding of the underlying macro social forces and micro human behaviour associated with postmodernism can ultimately be leveraged by marketers to obtain competitive advantages in an increasingly dynamic, unpredictable and unstable marketplace. References Alderson, W. (1965), Dynamic Marketing Behaviour: A Functionalist Theory of Marketing, R.D. Irwin, Homewood, IL. American Broadcasting Corporation (1988), “America’s kids: why they flunk”, Broadcast on 13 October. Andersen, K. (1994), “Las Vegas, USA”, Time, 10 January. Angus, I. and Jhally, S. (Eds) (1989), Cultural Politics in Contemporary America, Routledge, New York, NY. Aronowitz, S. (1988), Science as Power: Discourse and Ideology in Modern Society, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. Bagozzi, R.P. (1975), “Marketing as exchange”, Journal of Marketing, No. 39, pp. 32-39. Bagozzi, R.P. (1986), Principles of Marketing Management, Science Research Associates, Chicago, IL. Bannock, G., Baxter, R.E. and Rees, R. (1978), The Penguin Dictionary of Economics, 2nd ed., Penguin, Harmondsworth. Baudrillard, J. (1987), America, Verso, London. Baudrillard, J. (1990), Seduction, St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY. Baudrillard, J. (1993), Simulations, Semiotext(e), New York, NY. Bauman, Z. (1992), Intimations of Postmodernity, Routledge, New York, NY. Bergquist, W.H. (1993), The Postmodern Organization: Mastering the Art of Irreversible Change, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Bhaskar, R. (1991), Philosophy and the Idea of Freedom, Blackwell, Oxford. Blattberg, R.C. and Deighton, J. (1991), “Interactive marketing: exploiting the age of addressability”, Harvard Business Review, Fall, pp. 5-14. Brown, S. (1993a), “Postmodern marketing: principles, practice and panaceas”, Irish Marketing Review, No. 6, pp. 91-100. Brown, S. (1993b), “Postmodern marketing?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 19-34. Business Week (1992), “Move over boomers”, Business Week Cover Story, 14 December, pp. 74-82. Bylinsky, G. (1991), “The marvels of virtual reality”, Fortune, 3 June, pp. 138-50. Campbell, J. (1990), Transformations of Myth through Time, Harper & Row, New York, NY. Chomsky, N. (1989), Necessary Illusions, South End Press, Boston, MA.

Cova, B. (1995), “Community and consumption: towards a definition of the ‘linking value’ of products and services”, Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy Conference, ESSEC, Paris. Daily News Tribune (1990), “False sense of reality: artificial environment not so far out”, 21 October, pp. G1, G2. Derrida, J. (1982), Margins of Philosophy, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, (Trans. A. Bass). Eagleton, T. (1990), The Ideology of the Aesthetic, Blackwell, Oxford. Eco, U. (1986), Travels in Hyperreality, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, San Diego, CA, (Trans. W. Weaver). Eco, U. and Thomas A.S. (Eds) (1983), The Sign of Three: Dupin, Holmes, Pierce, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Elliott, S. (1993), “The famous brands on death row”, The New York Times, 7 November, p. B4. Evernden, N. (1989), “Nature in industrial society”, in Angus, I. and Jhally, S. (Eds), Cultural Politics in Contemporary America, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 151-64. Ewen, S. (1988), All Consuming Images: The Politics of Style in Contemporary Culture, Basic Books, New York, NY. Firat, A.F. (1990), “The consumer in postmodernity”, in Holman, R.H. and Solomon, M.R. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, XVII, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 70-6. Firat, A.F. (1991), “Postmodern culture, marketing, and the consumer”, in Childers, T. (Ed.), Marketing Theory and Application, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 237-42. Firat, A.F. (1992), “Postmodernism and the marketing organization”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 79-83. Firat, A.F. and Venkatesh, A. (1993), “Postmodernity: the age of marketing”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 227-49. Firat, A.F., Dholakia, N. and Venkatesh, A. (1995), “Marketing in a postmodern world”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 40-56. Firat, A.F. and Venkatesh, A. (1995), “Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment of consumption”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22, pp. 239-67. Firat, A.F., Venkatesh, A. and Sherry, J.F. Jr, (Guest Eds) (1993), International Journal of Research in Marketing, Postmodernism, Marketing and the Consumer, Special Issue, Vol. 10 No. 3. Firat, A.F., Venkatesh, A. and Sherry, J.F. Jr (Guest Eds) (1994), International Journal of Research in Marketing, Postmodernism, Marketing and the Consumer, Part 2, Special Issue, Vol. 11 No. 4. Foster, H. (1985), Recodings: Art, Spectacle, Cultural Politics, Bay Press, Seattle, WA. Foucault, M. (1980), Gordon, C. (Ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, Pantheon Books, New York, NY. Frampton, K. (1983), “Towards a critical regionalism: six points for an architecture of resistance”, in Foster, H. (Ed.), The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, Bay Press, Port Townsend, WA, pp. 16-30. Fullerton, R. (1988), “How modern is modern marketing? Marketing’s evolution and the myth of the ‘production era’”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, pp. 47-55. Galloway, K. and Rabinowitz, S. (1989), “Welcome to ‘Electronic Café International’”, Cyberarts, pp. 255-63. Gergen, K. (1991), The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Identity in Contemporary Life, Basic Books, New York, NY. Gitlin, T. (1989), “Postmodernism: roots and politics”, in Angus, I. and Jhally, S. (Eds), Cultural Politics in Contemporary America, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 347-60.

From segmentation to fragmentation 205

European Journal of Marketing 31,3/4 206

Gottdiener, M. and Lagopoulos, A.Ph. (Eds) (1986), The City and the Sign: An Introduction to Urban Semiotics, Columbia University Press, New York, NY. Habermas, J. (1983), “Modernity – an incomplete project”, in Foster, H. (Ed.), The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, Bay Press, Port Townsend, WA, pp. 3-15 (trans. Seyla BenHabib). Henion, K.E. II (1976), Ecological Marketing, Grid, Columbus, OH. Hill, S. (1993), “To choose or not to choose: a politics of choice”, The Humanist, May-June, pp. 3-6. Hutcheon, L. (1988), A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction, Routledge, New York, NY. Jameson, F. (1992), Postmodernism: Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, Duke University Press, Durham, NC. Jay, M. (1986), “In the empire of the gaze: Foucault and the denigration of vision in 20th century french thought”, in Appignanesi, L. (Ed.), Postmodernism, ICA Documents, Cranford Press Group, Craydon, pp. 19-25. Jencks, C. (1987), The Language of Post-modern Architecture, Rizzoli, New York, NY. Kaplan, E.A. (1987), Rocking around the Clock: Music Television, Postmodernism, and Consumer Culture, Methuen, New York, NY. Kellner, D. (1989), Jean Baudrillard: From Marxism to Postmodernism and Beyond, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. Kellner, D. (1990), Television and the Crisis of Democracy, Westview Press, Boulder, CO. Kotler, P. (1972), “A generic concept of marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36, pp. 46-54. Kotler, P. (1991), Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control, 7th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kotler, P. and Levy, S.J. (1969), “Broadening the concept of marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, pp. 10-15. Lacayo, R. (1994), “If everyone’s hip ... is anyone hip?”, Time, 8 August, pp. 48-55. Laing, R.D. (1969), The Divided Self, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth. Levin, K. (1988), Beyond Modernism: Essays on Art from the 70s and 80s, Harper & Row, New York, NY. Levy, S.J. and Zaltman, G. (1975), Marketing, Society and Conflict, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Lyotard, J-F. (1984), The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. Lyotard, J-F. (1992), The Postmodern Explained, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. Madison, G.B. (1988), The Hermeneutics of Postmodernity, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Marchetti, G. (1989), “Action-adventure as ideology”, in Angus, I. and Jhally, S. (Eds), Cultural Politics in Contemporary America, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 182-97. McKenna, R. (1988), “Marketing in an age of diversity”, Harvard Business Review, SeptemberOctober, pp. 88-94. Mill, J.S. (1836/1967), “The principles of political economy”, in Collected Works, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. Mill, J.S. (1859/1978), On Liberty, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., Indianapolis, IN. Mitchell, A. (1984), Inner Selves: Americans as They See Themselves, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA. Moyers, B. (1989), “Image and reality in America: consuming images”, The Public Mind, Public Broadcasting System, Broadcast on 15 November. Nicholson, L.J. (Ed.) (1990), Feminism/Postmodernism, Routledge, New York, NY.

Nietzsche, F. (1954), The Portable Nietzsche, Viking Penguin Inc., New York, NY, (Trans. W. Kaufmann). Ogilvy, J. (1990), “This postmodern business”, Marketing and Research Today, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 4-20. Park, C.W. and Zaltman, G. (1987), Marketing Management, Dryden Press, Chicago, IL. Postman, N. (1985), Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, Penguin Books, New York, NY. Rorty, R. (1979), Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Santambrogio, M. and Violi P. (1988), “Introduction”, in Eco, U., Santambrogio, M. and Violi, P. (Eds), Meaning and Mental Representations, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, pp. 322. Say, J-S. (1964/1821), A Treatise on Political Economy, A.M. Kelly, New York, NY. Sorkin, M. (Ed.) (1993), Variations on a Theme Park, The Noonday Press, New York, NY. Schmookler, A.B. (1992), The Illusion of Choice: How the Market Economy Shapes Our Destiny, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. Sherry, J.F. Jr (1991), “Postmodern alternatives: the interpretive turn in consumer research”, in Kassarjian, H. and Robertson, T. (Eds), Handbook of Consumer Theory and Research, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 548-91. Stanton, W.J. (1975), Fundamentals of Marketing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Steinhauer, J. (1994), “How do you turn on the twentysomething market?”, The New York Times, 17 April, p. B1. Stephanson, A. (1988), “Regarding postmodernism – a conversation with Fredric Jameson”, in Ross, A. (Ed.),Universal Abandon? University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 3-30. Tully, S. (1994), “Teens: the most global market of all”, Fortune, 16 May, pp. 90-7. van Raaij, W.F. (1993), “Postmodern consumption”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 14, pp. 541-63. Venkatesh, A. (1989), “Modernity and postmodernity: a synthesis or antithesis?”, in Childers, T. (Ed.), Proceedings, AMA Winter Educators’ Conference, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 99-104. Venkatesh, A. (1992), “Postmodernism, consumer culture and the society of the spectacle”, in Sherry, J.F. Jr and Sternthal, B. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, XIX, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 199-202. Wallis, B. (Ed.) (1984), Art after Modernism: Rethinking Representation, The New Museum of Contemporary Art, New York, NY. Wilson, E. (1989), Hallucinations: Life in the Post-modern City, Hutchinson Radius, London. Winders, J.A. (1991), Gender, Theory, and the Canon, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.

From segmentation to fragmentation 207