Why Marketing to Women Doesn’t Work

2013 was a significant year for me both personally and professionally. I turned 50 and promptly became an empty nester, as my younger son went off to college. I was also promoted to Full Professor at the Drucker School of Management.

The population is more or less split 50:50 between men and women. In 1990, the US Census reported that 48.9 percent of the population was women, rising to 50.8 percent in 2012. Women have a longer life expectancy than men (80 vs. 75 years in 2007) and, as a result, women are a slightly more dominant group in the 65-plus age group (57 percent) (Anon, 2011d).¹

The previous chapter outlined demographic differences between men and women. The current chapter focuses on what might be considered more complicated differences—namely, the psychographic and behavioral differences between men and women.

In Part I, I discussed demographic, behavioral and psychographic differences between men and women. In Part II, I will explain the theory and practice of market segmentation. In Part III, I will focus more specifically on how to effectively market to women.

In the previous chapter, I suggested marketing strategy focuses on strategic decisions the organization makes about the product-market space within which it competes. Therefore, in order to implement a marketing strategy, the organization must first understand its current products and then its current markets (that is, customers) before making any changes. I defined products and markets and briefly introduced Ansoff’s (1957) four growth strategies, which center around products and markets choices (see Figure 3.1). This chapter provides the tools to allow an in-depth analysis of current products; the next chapter examines current customers.

In the previous chapter on products, I provided broad diagnostic questions that could be used when analyzing the organization and its products. I suggested that a product portfolio analysis begin at the level of product class before moving onto individual products. I also introduced a method for analyzing products that treats a product as a series of three concentric circles: the core benefit or point of the product; the actual product, which includes both tangible and intangible features; and the augmented product, which comprises first and second order benefits of using the product. This was all done from the inside looking out, that is, from the point of view of how the organization sees its products. I also recommended repeating the exercise from the point of view of the customer, that is, how customers see products, how products meet customers’ needs and provide solutions for their problems. The current chapter focuses on an analysis of customers.

In Chapter 4, I introduced three concentric circles as a means of analyzing a product. I also explained how to ladder product features to first order and second order benefits. In Chapter 5, I applied a similar method to identify the tasks customers are trying to do (that is, the problems an organization’s customers are trying to solve and for which the organization’s product is a solution). I also discussed the functional and psychogenic benefits for customers of product purchases. It is now time to compare the customer and product ladders, and check for alignment between them.

So far, I have introduced the concept of Ansoff’s (1957) Growth Matrix a number of times. In this chapter, I will give a more in-depth overview of Ansoff’s four strategies for growth, which are introduced in Table 7.1 and developed throughout this chapter.

In Part III, I apply the lessons of Parts I and II to female customers. Recall that in Part I, demographic, behavioral and psychographic variables were described to outline differences between men and women. I also provided a small number of examples to show how customers can be placed into one of a small number of market segments, based upon their individual differences; however, I also noted that consumers have multiple identities and, as a result, move between profiles based upon particular contexts and needs.

Research data shows an increased blurring of the boundaries between female and male roles. For example, fathers do more around the house and take on more childcare responsibilities because their partners are more likely to work (Anon, 2007b). As a result, today’s fathers are more “hands on” with their children when compared to their own fathers and grandfathers (Anon, 2007b); the “jobs” fathers do at home now align more with the jobs traditionally reserved for mothers.