What I do think is correct, is thinking of it as an heuristic exercise — trial and error of "initial conditions" to see the emergent behavior seems to be the primary way to get to where you want to be.

In regards to when and product review cycles – I would agree most segmentation is carried out post product creation (albeit this tends to be driven by a desire to be first to market then any other cause) but a responsive marketing strategist should have the analytical foundation to adjust marketing in response to observed reactions across different audience groups. This can be done as fast as the data collection and product development capabilities allow.

But fundementally I believe People buy emotionally and justify their decisions logically – and as such because people have different tastes – emotional stimulus and consequential reaction will differ and can be clustered through analysis.

I still think the key message in your theory is how granular a segmentation process should be for any given product or service – that I think is a key strategic decision to be assessed upfront when determining the basis for a marketing strategy.

Paul

Thanks for your reply – I found your intial conjecture insightful and thought provoking hence my response.

Fundementally I agree that we are all influenced by many of the same things but I believe what differentiates our behaviour is our reaction to those common influences.

Consequently I feel it is the objective of a good marketing strategy to anticipate those differing reactions and identify MEANINGFUL segments and to address specific messaging regarding product or service capabilities to those segments.

The FMCG Brand practioners are good exemplars of creating reactionary responses that draw followers and cause influence that drives purchasing.

In B2B the broadest segmentation is surely the archetypal adoption curve for new products (Early Adopters, Late Majority etc) this is driven by reaction to risk which I would argue is a base ubiquitous motivator – however I would choose different messaging to address different parts of the adoption curve.

(tbc)

We do have different tastes – definitely. If you look at the very last VIN diagram, I am trying to communicate that we are emotionally INFLUENCED by the same things but you have to find where those things overlap your product attributes and your customer base's unique tastes (primary data).

Also, I would say that WHEN is the return on effort worth the segmentation. In my experience, it is much better spent AFTER you have created your product, improved based on your userbase's interactions and want to turn the dial up and expand your product's reach. By bias is that this is where many people begin the product/messaging devlopment process – which I believe to be flawed.

Also keep in mind that I work in the digital world where testing and tweaking based on primary data, multivariate testing, etc. can be done in a matter of days. I still believe the theory can be universally applied. It may be less apparent in slower moving product cycles.

Thanks for you comment. Your questioning is very helpful in helping me be more coherent in my communicating this.