DON E. SCHULTZNorthwestern UniversityPHILIP 1. KITCHENStrathclyde University(U.K.)Integrated Marketing Communications in U.S.Advertising Agencies: An Exploratory StudyThis paper reviews the development of the concept of Integrated MarketingCommunications (IMC) in terms of its theoretical foundations through an exploratorystudy of IMC within a judgment sample of U.S. advertising agencies (total estimatedbillings-$20.4 billion). The paper considers the arguments advanced from bothacademic and practitioner sides in relation to what IMC is and whether it offerssignificant value to advertising agencies and their clients in the rapidly changingcommunications marketspace leading toward the next millennium.THIS PAPER IS ONE OF A SERIES relating to a continu-ing, now becoming worldwide, investigation ofthe emergent concept and field of Integrated Mar-keting Communications (IMC). The original re-search in this field began in 1991 by faculty at theMedill School of Journalism, Northwestern Uni-versity, in the United States (Caywood et al., 1991).This paper extends knowledge on how the conceptof IMC is diffusing by providing an initial analysisof data on how senior advertising agency execu-tives perceive IMC use and development in theUnited States. It provides a perspective on the cur-rent state of IMC and levels of implementation andusage in an important segment of the marketingcommunications landscape. Additional studieswill follow with advertising agencies in India,Australia, New Zealand, and Norway. A similarstudy has already been conducted in the UnitedKingdom. Results of that study are not includedhere.This paper represents an interactive effortamong three groups: the IMC faculty, MedillSchool of Journalism, Northwestern University,Evanston, Illinois, U.S.; the Research Centre forCorporate and Marketing Communications,Strathclyde University, Glasgow, Scotland, U.K.;and the American Association of AdvertisingAgencies (AAAA), New York, NY, U.S. The sec-ond group was responsible for adapting and ex-tending the original research study conducted byNorthwestern University in 1991 (Caywood et al.,1991). The study was furthered by the support ofthe 4A’s which provided not only a membershiplist of active agencies for questionnaire distribu-tion but a cover letter of support as well.The research explored three related objectives:1. To deepen understanding of how and in whatareas the IMC concept is developing in theUnited States2. To examine the extent to which a group of ma-jor U.S. advertising agency executives are de-veloping, practicing, or utilizing IMC on behalfof their clients.3. To understand the importance and value of tra-ditional advertising agencies in a marketplacewhere IMC is apparently becoming moreimportant.The research is predicated on the dynamic thatthere may well be wide variation and differingviews concerning what IMC conceptually repre-sents and how it might be practiced. Thus, theimplementation of an integrated approach by ad-vertising agencies for their clients may well differnot only in thought but in practice. Thus the paperis not necessarily concerned with either a consen-sual or conclusive mission. Its overall aim is toexplore the multiple dimensions of the IMC con-cept, thus helping underpin future research.LITERATURE REVIEWPrior to the study conducted by Caywood et al.(1991) there appears to be little or no formal dis-September l October 1997 JOUMRL Of AllUERTlSlIIG RESEARCH 7IMC IN U.S. AD AGENCIEScussion or even description of what isnow called Integrated Marketing Commu-nications. While doubtless there had beenpractitioner discussions and trade pressarticles, the Northwestern study, fundedby the 4A’s and the Association of Na-tional Advertisers (ANA) appears to bethe first formal, well-defined attempt tobring some understanding of the conceptto the literature. Thus, most of the historyof IMC thinking and discussion is gener-ally less than seven years old. While therehas been considerable debate and discus-sion of the subject, i.e., who does it, how itis done, etc., the formal presentation of re-search, theory development, and othermaterials by either practitioners or aca-demics has been slow in coming.Given its history, much of the IMC lit-erature and learning has focused on theexplanation of IMC in the marketplace,i.e., what it is, how it operates in the com-munications arena, etc., rather than ontheory building or understanding of thebasic principles. These points must bekept in mind, for while the literature issparse at this point, it is apparently grow-ing rather rapidly.Schultz (1991) formalized the IMC dis-cussion in the United States by arguingthat nothing [in the United States] had re-ceived as much publicity and discussionat learned meetings, while seeing littlereal activity, as had the concept of IMC in1990. At that time most manufacturersand marketing organizations in theUnited States were still trying to sortout the need for and value of IMC.What is evident now, some six yearslater, is that the concept is still undergo-ing development.A special issue of the Journal of Mnvkef-ing Cornmmicafions (1996) devoted to IMCfound virtually all the papers dealt withtheory building and/or identification ofkey issues-in other words IMC still ap-peared to be in a pre-paradigm as op-There does not, at this time, appear to be any consistentor mutually agreed upon definition, description, or pro-cess to identify what is IMC and what it is not.posed to a post-paradigm state. This is asexpected for integration is not the norm inWestern cultures despite papers to thecontrary (Kotler, 1972, 1986, 1997; Kitchenand Proctor, 1991; Kitchen, 1993, 1994,1996; Kitchen and Moss, 1995; Duncan,1993,1995; Duncan and Everett, 1993; No-velli, 1989-1990; Waterschoot and vanBulte, 1992). However, most mainstreammarketing texts and more specializedbooks on marketing communications havepractically all adopted some type of inte-grated communication approach or per-spective (Kotler, 1997; Zikmund andD’Amico, 1996; Shimp, 1993; Belch andBelch, 1995; Krugman et al., 1994), a suresign that IMC is progressing into accept-ability and is becoming entrenched as per-ceived “academic wisdom” in generalmarketing.While various authors and researchershave developed some type of IMC ap-proach or concept for their teaching andresearch, each appears to have done so in-dependent of the others, or at least eachhas developed the concept from his or herown view. There does not, at this