Why This Matters
Advertising models aren't just academic frameworks—they're the blueprints that explain why certain ads work and others fall flat. When you're tested on these concepts, you're being asked to demonstrate understanding of consumer psychology, persuasion mechanics, and strategic communication planning. These models connect directly to bigger course themes: how advertisers influence behavior, why different products require different approaches, and how brands build lasting relationships with audiences.
The models you'll encounter fall into distinct categories: sequential response models that map the consumer journey, involvement-based frameworks that match strategy to product type, brand equity models that measure long-term value, and environmental analysis tools that shape campaign context. Don't just memorize acronyms—know what psychological principle each model illustrates and when you'd apply one over another.
Sequential Response Models
These classic frameworks map the stages consumers move through from first exposure to final action. The core assumption: persuasion happens in predictable, sequential steps, and advertisers must address each stage.
AIDA Model (Attention, Interest, Desire, Action)
- The foundational four-stage model—developed in the late 1800s, it remains the most widely referenced framework for understanding consumer response
- Linear progression assumes consumers must first notice an ad, then engage cognitively, then want the product emotionally, before finally acting
- Primary limitation is its assumption of rational, step-by-step processing—modern research shows consumers often skip stages or move non-linearly
Hierarchy of Effects Model
- Six-stage expansion of AIDA—adds awareness, knowledge, liking, preference, conviction, and purchase as distinct phases
- Cognitive-affective-conative sequence means consumers first think, then feel, then act—a pattern that works best for high-involvement purchases
- Developed by Lavidge and Steiner (1961) specifically to measure advertising effectiveness at each stage, not just final sales
DAGMAR Model
- Defines advertising goals by communication tasks—the acronym stands for Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results
- Russell Colley's 1961 framework shifted focus from sales outcomes to measurable communication objectives like awareness and comprehension
- Four stages (awareness, comprehension, conviction, action) allow advertisers to set benchmarks and evaluate campaign effectiveness at each level
Compare: AIDA vs. Hierarchy of Effects—both assume sequential processing, but Hierarchy of Effects adds knowledge and preference stages between cognition and action. On an FRQ about measuring campaign effectiveness at different stages, Hierarchy of Effects or DAGMAR gives you more specific benchmarks to discuss.
Involvement and Processing Models
These frameworks recognize that not all purchases require the same mental effort. The key insight: consumer involvement level and thinking/feeling orientation should dictate your advertising strategy.
- Two-dimensional matrix plotting involvement level (high/low) against thinking/feeling orientation to create four quadrants
- High-involvement/thinking quadrant (cars, insurance) requires informative ads; high-involvement/feeling (jewelry, fashion) needs emotional, image-based creative
- Low-involvement quadrants suggest habit-formation strategies (thinking) or impulse-triggering tactics (feeling)—matching message to product type
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
- Petty and Cacioppo's dual-process theory—explains how consumers process persuasive messages based on motivation and ability
- Central route processing occurs when consumers carefully evaluate message arguments; produces stronger, more lasting attitude change
- Peripheral route relies on heuristic cues like celebrity endorsers or visual appeal; effective for low-involvement situations but creates weaker attitudes
Rossiter-Percy Grid
- Refines the FCB Grid by distinguishing between informational (negative motivation) and transformational (positive motivation) appeals
- Informational motives include problem removal and problem avoidance; transformational motives include sensory gratification and social approval
- Strategic implication: match creative execution to both involvement level and underlying purchase motivation
Compare: FCB Grid vs. Rossiter-Percy Grid—both use involvement and emotional dimensions, but Rossiter-Percy adds motivation type (solving problems vs. seeking pleasure). If asked to recommend a strategy for a luxury product, Rossiter-Percy's transformational/high-involvement quadrant provides more specific guidance.
Brand Equity Models
These frameworks measure and build long-term brand value beyond immediate sales. The principle: strong brands create assets that compound over time through consistent consumer relationships.
Brand Asset Valuator (BAV)
- Young & Rubicam's four-pillar model—measures brand health through differentiation, relevance, esteem, and knowledge
- Differentiation and relevance indicate brand strength (future growth potential); esteem and knowledge indicate brand stature (current standing)
- Diagnostic power comes from comparing pillar scores—high differentiation but low knowledge suggests an emerging brand; the reverse signals decline
Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) Model
- Keller's pyramid framework—builds brand equity through four sequential levels from identity to resonance
- Brand salience (bottom) → performance/imagery → judgments/feelings → resonance (top) represents increasing consumer-brand connection
- Resonance at the pyramid's peak indicates active loyalty, attachment, and community engagement—the ultimate brand equity goal
Compare: BAV vs. CBBE—BAV diagnoses current brand health across four dimensions simultaneously, while CBBE prescribes a sequential building process. Use BAV to analyze where a brand stands; use CBBE to explain how to strengthen brand equity over time.
Communication Objectives Models
These frameworks define what advertising should accomplish beyond generating sales. The insight: different campaigns serve different purposes, and objectives should be explicit and measurable.
DRIP Model
- Four communication objectives—Differentiate, Reinforce, Inform, Persuade—provide a checklist for campaign planning
- Differentiate establishes unique positioning; Reinforce maintains existing perceptions; Inform educates about features; Persuade drives action
- Strategic flexibility allows campaigns to emphasize different objectives depending on brand lifecycle stage and competitive context
Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) Model
- Unified approach ensures message consistency across all touchpoints—advertising, PR, digital, direct marketing, and sales promotion
- "One voice" principle means every consumer interaction reinforces the same brand positioning and key messages
- Coordination challenge requires breaking down organizational silos; success depends on strategic alignment, not just tactical execution
Compare: DRIP vs. IMC—DRIP defines what communication should achieve, while IMC addresses how to deliver consistent messages across channels. An FRQ about fragmented media environments would benefit from discussing both: DRIP for objectives, IMC for execution.
These frameworks analyze external and internal factors that shape advertising strategy. The principle: effective campaigns respond to market context, not just creative instincts.
PEST Analysis
- Macro-environmental scanning tool—examines Political, Economic, Social, and Technological factors affecting advertising strategy
- Political factors include regulations on ad content and media; Economic factors affect consumer spending and media costs
- Social and technological shifts (demographic changes, platform evolution) create both constraints and opportunities for reaching audiences
SWOT Analysis
- Internal/external assessment framework—Strengths and Weaknesses are internal; Opportunities and Threats are external
- Strategic matching pairs internal strengths with external opportunities; identifies vulnerabilities where weaknesses meet threats
- Campaign application helps identify competitive advantages to emphasize and market conditions to exploit or avoid
Porter's Five Forces Model
- Industry competition analysis—examines rivalry, supplier power, buyer power, substitutes, and new entrants
- Advertising implications emerge from competitive intensity—high rivalry demands differentiation; powerful buyers require value communication
- Strategic positioning helps brands identify sustainable advantages and craft messages that address competitive pressures
Compare: PEST vs. SWOT—PEST analyzes only external macro-factors, while SWOT includes internal assessment. Use PEST for understanding the advertising environment; use SWOT for brand-specific strategic planning.
Consumer Motivation Models
These frameworks explain why consumers respond to advertising appeals. The insight: effective persuasion connects to fundamental human needs and adoption patterns.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
- Five-level pyramid from physiological needs (base) through safety, belonging, esteem, to self-actualization (peak)
- Advertising application: match appeals to need levels—security for insurance, belonging for social products, self-actualization for premium brands
- Hierarchical assumption suggests lower needs must be satisfied before higher needs motivate behavior—though modern research questions this rigidity
Diffusion of Innovation Theory
- Rogers' adoption curve segments consumers into innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards
- Communication strategies differ by segment—innovators respond to novelty; early majority needs social proof; laggards require simplicity and reassurance
- Crossing the chasm between early adopters and early majority represents the critical challenge for new product advertising
Compare: Maslow's Hierarchy vs. Diffusion of Innovation—Maslow explains what motivates consumers (underlying needs), while Diffusion explains when different consumers adopt (timing patterns). Both inform targeting: Maslow for message appeals, Diffusion for audience segmentation.
Quick Reference Table
|
| Sequential consumer response | AIDA, Hierarchy of Effects, DAGMAR |
| Involvement-based strategy | FCB Grid, Rossiter-Percy Grid, ELM |
| Persuasion processing routes | ELM (central vs. peripheral) |
| Brand equity measurement | BAV, CBBE Model |
| Communication objectives | DRIP, DAGMAR, IMC |
| Environmental analysis | PEST, SWOT, Porter's Five Forces |
| Consumer motivation | Maslow's Hierarchy, Diffusion of Innovation |
| Message consistency | IMC Model |
Self-Check Questions
-
Which two models both use involvement level and thinking/feeling dimensions to guide strategy, and what additional factor does Rossiter-Percy add that FCB doesn't?
-
If a brand shows high differentiation but low knowledge in a BAV analysis, what does this suggest about the brand's position, and what advertising objective (using DRIP) should be prioritized?
-
Compare and contrast the central and peripheral routes in the Elaboration Likelihood Model—for what types of products would each route be most effective?
-
An FRQ asks you to explain why the same advertising strategy wouldn't work for both early adopters and the late majority. Using Diffusion of Innovation Theory, what key differences in these segments would you identify?
-
How does the DAGMAR model's focus on communication tasks rather than sales represent a different philosophy of advertising effectiveness than simply measuring AIDA's final "Action" stage?