David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

David OGorman College of Business and Management University of Illinois at Springfield

Executive Summary
It is well known that genes seek to replicate themselves. Not as well known is a new field of study called memetics that claims the existence of a second replicator called a meme. Memes can be likened to a cultural virus that hops from one mind to another. Although research on memetics is progressing in the sciences, its impact on marketing and competitive intelligence has been minimal. This paper suggests an integrated way to tie memetics to marketing and competitive intelligence. Included is an example of how memes can be extracted from competitors public documents and used for marketing purposes. Suggestions for additional research on the relationship of memes, marketing and competitive intelligence are also included.

Key Words
Memes, memetics, competitive intelligence, marketing, psychographics, decision making, University of Phoenix, Single Loop, Clare Graves, VALS, viral marketing, competitor profiling.

About the Author

David O'Gorman is a Professor of Business Administration at the University of Illinois at Springfield. Prior to entering academia, he worked in marketing research at Bristol-Myers and in marketing information systems at Marathon Oil Company. He holds a bachelor's degree in Marketing, an MBA, and an interdisciplinary doctorate (University of Pittsburgh). His recent teaching experience includes Competitive Information Systems, Strategic Decision Support Systems, Marketing Communications, and Executive Decision Making. His research interests include the application of memetics to marketing and competitive intelligence, consumer psychographics based on the theories of Clare Graves, and building

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

29

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

complex adaptive organizations through intelligencebased decision making processes.

Introduction
Traditional competitive intelligence (CI) has focused on identifying what competitors are doing. The framework presented in this paper will help illuminate why competitors behave the way they do. It is perhaps premature to write this article because the new field of memetics is not well developeda fledgling paradigm as Williams (2000) has observed. Additionally, the field of competitive intelligence is still in the process of finding its role in many corporations (Subramanian and Ishak, 1998; Harkleroad, 1998; Ganesh, Miree and Prescott, 2003). Another constraint is that the relationship of CI to marketing is not clear. The field of CI had its origins in marketing research in the 1960s, but since then, CI has developed on its own, with significant philosophical and operational differences between CI and marketing research (Walle, 1999a). The linkage between CI and marketing, especially the sales area, is tenuous (Powell and Allgaier, 1998). Although the memetics picture is fuzzy, there is sufficient clarity to make some initial suggestions regarding the relationship of memes, competitive intelligence and marketing. The field of memetics continues to develop rapidly in the social sciences and the biological sciences (Aunger, 2001 and 2002). The field of CI should not wait until the field of memetics is fully developed (which may be many years) before addressing the implications for CI. Similarly, marketers who are trying to survive and prosper in a highly competitive environment need all the help they can get sooner rather than later. This paper offers some preliminary thoughts about the relationship of memetics, CI and marketing, with an emphasis on actionable intelligence, e.g., how we can systematically gather information about customer and competitor memes and use that information to make smart business decisions.

We have quite a way to go, however. This paper suggests several areas for future research because (1) we dont know enough about memetics and its potential uses in marketing and CI, (2) we dont know how memetics relates to consumer psychographics, and (3) we dont know how memetics relates to the problem of utilization of meme-based CI for decisionmaking purposes.

What are memes anyway?

The most common definition is that memes (rhymes with dreams) are ideas, beliefs or cultural values that replicate themselves from one brain to another, somewhat like a virus (Brodie, 1996). The Oxford English Dictionary (2005) defines meme as: Meme: An element of behavior or culture passed on by imitation or other non-genetic means. The term meme was coined by Oxford University evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene (Dawkins, 1976). Since then, the term has gained popularity, and refinements of the concept have emerged. One measure of the increased interest in memes is the number of times memetic has been mentioned on the Internet. In 1998 there were about 5,000 hits (Blackmore, 1999). In mid-2002, the number of hits on memetic was 20,000. By October of 2003 it was 47,000, and increased to 140,000 by mid-2004. In January of 2005, there were 177,000 hits (OGorman, 2005a). Although Dawkins coined the term meme in 1976, the notion of cultural transmission had been around in the social sciences for a long time. However, as Aunger (1999) points out, the notion of cultural selectionism as promulgated by biologists and anthropologists does not include the key point of Dawkins concept, i.e., that memes seek to replicate themselves in a way analogous to the way genes do. Memes are a new replicator, a second replicator. The notion that human behavior is shaped by two replicators, genes and memes, has profound implications for our understanding of the human evolutionary processes (Blackmore, 1999; Dawkins, 1998; Dennett, 1991 and 1995; Lynch, 1996; Ridley, 2003).

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

30

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

By extension, memes drive much of the human behavior that we in business have an interest in understanding.

Why should a CEO use this framework?

The concepts presented herein can be used by any organization whether they have a pre-existing CI function or do CI informally. For the experienced CI shops, the framework outlined herein provides a logical extension of existing CI efforts. CI professionals will recognize a similarity to the techniques of content analysis (Neuendorf, 2001), and remote profiling (Fahey, 1999; Vella and McGonagle, 2000; Walle, 1999b). For those organizations that do not have a formal CI program, the approach described below will provide a focused CI activity that can be executed by their sales force and marketing staff. Since it is likely that sales reps are already being used as a source of competitive intelligence, the framework proposed here provides additional structure for their CI activities. The point is that with minimal effort, memebased intelligence can be gathered and fed into the organizations decision-making process. Often CI efforts are criticized as theoretical exercises not directly connected to the real world (Subramanian and Ishak, 1998; Harkleroad, 1998; Ganesh, Miree and Prescott, 2003). Focusing on memes almost automatically stimulates creative adaptation in the form of the search for practical countermemes or memetically-based strategies.

Developing a memetic profile of competitors top managers

Competitors memes are of interest on two levels: (1) the meme-set of competitors top management, e.g., their memetic profile; and (2) the meme-set surrounding individual products. Competitor profiling is a powerful, but underutilized technique (Vella and McGonagle, 2000), and the addition of memetics to already known profiling approaches may allow the practice to be more widely

used. Profiling can be viewed within the larger context of social science research on understanding cultures (Walle, 1999b), and within the field of CI it can be viewed as an exercise in the mental categorization of competitors (Saxby, Nitse and Dishman, 2000). CI practitioners ought to be particularly interested in identifying the memes held by a competitors top management team because, if memetic theory is correct, their memes are replicated within their organizations and become a major determinant of the strategy and tactics of the competitor. The memetic profiling process consists of steps adapted from Sathes (1985) cultural assessment approach. First, raw memetic inputs are collected from speeches, interviews, or writings of top managers of competitors. For example, one source might be sentences or paragraphs from a Letter to Shareholders in the competitors annual report. Next, dominant memes, called meta-memes, are inferred from the collection of the raw memetic inputs generated in step one. The memetic profiling process is not difficult. A reasonably intelligent person reviews speeches, transcripts of interviews, annual reports and other documents of a competitors top management in order to collect statements containing relevant themes (memes). This collection then becomes the raw material for developing a summary assessment of the memesthe meta-memes. The memetic profile consisting of these meta-memes then can be expected to be replicated within the competitors organization as a whole. The memetic profile should then be compared to the actual behavior in order to verify that the metamemes that have been identified are in fact being replicated within the competitors organization. Therefore, the memetic profiling process consists of:
Identification of competitor memes from top managements statements in annual reports and other sources. Based on the memes so identified, generation of meta-memes that are likely to drive the competitors organization.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

31

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Examination of evidence to see if the meta-memes are being replicated within the competitors organization.

For example, if one were to review the speeches of Ronald Reagan prior to his becoming President, one would find memes and meta-memes related to his dislike of Communism. His meme-driven behavior as President shaped the policies of the United States Government which in turn contributed to significant changes in Communist countries.

Example: A memetic profile of The University of Phoenix

In just ten years the University of Phoenix, part of the Apollo Group, has grown from a small private institution to the largest private university in the United States. The University of Phoenix has campuses throughout the country, and also is the largest provider of entirely online degrees in the world through its University of Phoenix Online subsidiary. This memetic profile of the University of Phoenix begins with an examination of the Letters to Shareholders from the Chairman, other statements by the University of Phoenix top management team, and the written history of the University of Phoenix which most likely was either written or influenced by top management. Memes and meta-memes are compared to the actual behavior of the organization to verify that the behavior of the University of Phoenix was consistent with the memes and meta-memes. Step 1: Raw memetic inputs. The raw memetic inputs shown in Exhibit 1 were derived from Annual Reports of the Apollo Group, the parent company of the University of Phoenix. Exhibit 1 Raw Memetic Inputs (RMI) from Annual Reports of the Apollo Group RMI 1: Apollo is resolved to be the dominant force in higher education for adults both domestically and internationally. We will do this by continuing to provide the most current and relevant education in the most convenient and efficient

format possible. Our goal is to make Apollo known and admired around the globe. (Sperling, 1999, p. 1) RMI 2: Apollo is committed to strengthening its leadership position in adult higher education, both domestically and internationally. We will do this by constantly seeking better ways to answer the educational needs of working professionals, continuing to develop the most relevant curricula, and delivering them in the most efficient way possible. (Sperling, 1999, p. 3) RMI 3: Education must not only be relevant to the demands of technology, it must be efficient in terms of time and place. Thus the current mantraAnywhere, Anytime Education. Many traditional educational institutions are unable to respond to the demands of this market, but the Apollo Group companies respond rapidly and do it with innovation and inspiration. The writings on the chalkboard. In the 21st century there will be two kinds of educational institutions: the quick and the dead. (Sperling, 2000, p. 1) RMI 4: In fact, experts estimate that 90% of the Internet education market has yet to be tapped, and University of Phoenix Online is uniquely positioned to answer this enormous demand. (Sperling, 2000, p. 2) RMI 5: The issuance of University of Phoenix Online common stock (UOPX) raised over $70 million. This capital infusion will enable us to enhance University of Phoenix Onlines infrastructure, increase staffing, expand its marketing and sales, and in so doing, leverage University of Phoenixs leadership position and further increase its market share. (Sperling, 2000, p. 2) RMI 6: Looking forward, we at Apollo Group confirm our commitment to provide higher education of unsurpassed convenience, efficiency, and value to working professionals. The dramatic spread of our innovative educational format, from

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

32

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

coast to coast and around the world, confirms the power of an idea whose time has come. Were at the forefront of a new era in higher education, and were just getting started. (Sperling, 2000, p. 2) RMI 7: Over the years, hundreds of colleges and universities have competed with Apollo by offering programs that incorporate various aspects of Apollos instructional systems. Most recently they are offering courses and degree programs using Internet and Web technologies that are designed to compete directly with University of Phoenix Online. Because all but a handful of these online programs are being offered by public and nonprofit institutions, they can operate at a loss. Nevertheless, they have yet to pose a serious competitive threat to University of Phoenix Online. (Sperling, 2001, p. 2) RMI 8: At Apollo Group, we intend to retain and strengthen our market dominance and our leadership position in higher education in order to ensure that, a decade hence, our courseware will be educating more people faster, better, and cheaper around the globe. (Sperling, 2001, p. 2) RMI 9: But the big story this coming year will be rEsource. With rEsource, all course materials are created digitally and delivered via the Internet. Students will have instant access to their course materials, syllabi, textbooks, assigned reading, powerful multimedia presentations, plus the University Library and hyperlinks to relevant websites, all at a lower cost. At the same time, the course materials can be updated and re-configured easily, so content will be more current and more relevant to the course of study. This innovative delivery method for course materials promises to provide a competitive advantage that will further our lead in higher education. (Sperling, 2001, p. 2)

RMI 10: At all Apollo Group subsidiaries, we strive to improve the quality and value of our programs and products. As a result, we continue to extend our competitive advantage, expand our markets, and increase profitability for our shareholders. (Sperling, 2002, p. 3) RMI 11: All college enrollments are projected to expand over the next decade. College enrollment among students that work full or part time is expected to grow even faster. Whereas most colleges and universities are not designed for this working population, Apollo Group is. At Apollo Group, our completely scalable format utilizing practitioner faculty is uniquely qualified to answer this demand. (Sperling and Nelson, 2003, p. 3) RMI 12: Sperling anticipated the confluence of technological, economic, and demographic forces that would in a very short time herald the return of ever-larger numbers of working adults to formal higher education.According to Sperling, working adult students were invisible on the traditional campus and were treated as second-class citizens.As an institution, University of Phoenix is unique in its single-minded commitment to the educational needs of working adults. (Apollo Group, 2004b) RMI 13: Indeed, we are keenly aware of the competition inside and outside of the industry, but it will not dictate how we operate. We are the leaders in this industry and have developed a strategic plan to increase our distance from the packa fact that has been borne out by our increased geographic breadth and our rapidly rising enrollment numbers. (Nelson, 2004, p. 3) Step 2: Extraction of meta-memes Once the raw memetic material has been assembled, the next step is to determine the meta-memes exhibited in the material. This step is analogous to what organizational anthropologist Sathe has

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

33

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

described in a unit on deciphering a culture. Sathe (1985) said, The most subjective and tricky part in the process of deciphering a culture is in distilling the content of culture from its many manifestations. Because of the subjective nature of both the selection of the raw memes and the extraction of metamemes, it would be a good idea to have more than one person involved in the process. The meta-memes for the University of Phoenix are shown in Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2 University of Phoenix Meta-Memes Derived from Raw Memetic Inputs Meta-meme #1: The University of Phoenix targets working adults. (Based on RMIs 1, 2, 6, and 11) Meta-meme #2: The University of Phoenix should operate in a highly efficient manner. (Based on RMIs 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 11) Meta-meme #3: The University of Phoenix should strive for aggressive growth. (Based on RMIs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, and 13) Meta-meme #4: Traditional higher education is a dinosaur incapable of meeting the needs of working adults. (Based on RMIs 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11 and 12) Meta-meme #5: The University of Phoenix views higher education as a competitive environment. (Based on RMIs 1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 13) Step 3: Evidence of execution of the meta-memes In this step, it is judicious to verify that the memes and meta-memes are in fact being replicated within the organization. In the case of the Apollo Group, it appears that they are. Revenues at the Apollo Group have grown from $125 million in 1994 to $1.8 billion in 2004 (Apollo Group, 2004a). With enrollment in excess of 228,000 students, up from 32,000 in 1994, the University of Phoenix is the largest non-profit university in the United States, and on track to become the largest university in the world. Dedication to the needs of working adults remains strong, with professional degree programs such as information systems, business, nursing, and criminal

justice. No private or public university comes close to meeting University of Phoenix Online enrollments, which confirms Chairman Sperlings view that traditional institutions of higher education are maladapted to serving the needs of working adults. Operating efficiencies from a scalable course design and the centralization of student services continue to be implemented (Apollo Group, 2003 and 2004a). Overall, the University of Phoenix is executing its meta-memes.

Memetic sub-profiles for individual products

A memetic profile of top management such as the one shown above describes the meme-set that drives the overall behavior of an organization. However, corporations typically have more than one product or service. If that is the case, memetic sub-profiles can be developed for each product or service. For the balance of this paper, the term product will be used in a broader sense to include services. The development of the memetic sub-profiles involves gathering and utilizing several sources of memes and meta-memes. The primary source of memes and meta-memes for a sub-profile are derived from the memetic profile of the top management team as described in the previous section. The question to be explored is to what extent top managements memes and meta-memes influence the meme-set for a specific product. Some products may operate with a meme-set that is virtually identical to that of top management. In other organizations, there also may be influence from the following sources:
The memes of the founder(s) of the product. The memes of the founder, or founding group, of the product in question could be in operation even if the founder is no longer involved in the product. Although not specifically focused on memes, Schein (1983) has found that the founder(s) have a significant long-term influence on an organizations culture. Therefore, in the construction of memetic sub-profiles for individual products, it is

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

34

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

desirable to try to ascertain the extent that the founder(s) memes are present in the current operations of the competitors product. Industry characteristics. The memes associated with a competitors product could be shaped by the type of industry that it is in. Galbraith (1983), for example, has found distinct cultural differences between downstream organizations (close to the ultimate consumer) and upstream organizations (close to the raw materials). Downstream companies are consumer oriented and place a great deal of emphasis on meeting the wants and needs of the consumer. Upstream companies, such as in mining and manufacturing, tend to focus on being the low-cost producer. Not surprisingly, there seems to be a relationship between the types of degrees held by managers and the type of industry they are in. Upstream companies tend to have top managers who have degrees in engineering, science or technology. Downstream companies tend to have top managers with degrees in business, liberal arts, or the social sciences. Information about the industrys center of gravity and degrees held can provide clues to the memes the managers hold. Memes of managers and staff. The competitors sales managers and marketing staff also have memes they have acquired from their own experiences. Therefore it is desirable to try to determine the backgrounds of those individuals in the competitors organization who are responsible for managing the product. Other. There may be other factors that influence the memetic sub-profile of competitors, such as unique internal factors, external environmental issues or memes picked up from articles, books, classes or seminars.

Creating and using memetic subprofiles for industrial products

For industrial products, it is the sales force that would be the primary collector of competitor memes. The marketing staff, and CI personnel if available, would also assist. The types of questions about the memes of the competitor that could be discretely asked by the sales force (or other managers or staff) are shown below. These questions could be asked of customers, suppliers and possibly the sales reps of competitors. Tips for how to ask such questions can be found in Nolan (1999), in which he describes how to elicit business intelligence in a conversational style. Some questions your sales force could ask are:
Who is heading up this product group at XYZ Corporation? What is their educational background at the bachelors level? What advanced degrees do they have? In what fields? What company did they work at prior to joining their present company? What part of the organization did they work in initially? What is the new product development process at XYZ? If XYZs sales rep has an idea to improve something, how is that handled? How is the XYZ organization doing? What factors are affecting their performance? What are the XYZ organizations strengths? What does the XYZ organization not do so well? How is the support in the XYZ organization for sales and marketing? What are the XYZ products main selling points? How do customers view XYZs main selling points?

The following sections describe how the above sources can be used to generate a memetic sub-profile of competitors products. The specific techniques used to generate the memetic sub-profiles would vary depending whether the product is an industrial product or a consumer product.

In reporting the results of their inquiries, sales reps should be encouraged to add their own impressions of XYZs main selling points, as well as describing approaches they find are effective in coun-

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

35

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

tering XYZs selling points. Sales reps can also be asked for suggestions for modifying their own companys advertising and promotional materials to better counter competitor memes. There are several options for utilizing competitor memes and meta-memes in the industrial personal selling process. The competitor memes and metamemes, once identified, can be used by marketing staff and sales managers to formulate counter-meme strategies. In addition, the intelligence gathering process described above should facilitate the identification of those sales reps that are particularly good at implanting certain types of counter-memes. Once identified, these individuals could be established as specialists in the same way that some sales reps are used as trainers. These counter-meme specialists could then be made available to other sales reps that have a need for that particular counter-meme strategy.

In consumer marketing, advertising is the primary influence in the establishment of memes in the minds of consumers. Advertisers routinely assume that the message they intend to implant in consumers is the message actually received. This is not necessarily the case, and marketing research is needed to determine which memes have been received. The Beer Wars of 2004 (Ewing, 2004) illustrate some of the complex issues associated with attempting to implant advertising messages (memes) in the minds of consumers.

Beer Wars: The Bud Light-Miller Lite battle

Anheuser-Busch, for many years, has held the dominant position in the U.S. beer market with almost a 50% market share. Budweiser and Bud Light were their lead products. Miller products were a distant second in the United States with about a 25% market share. Miller Brewing Company, as a result of its acquisition by South African Brewery in 2002, launched an aggressive advertising campaign targeted directly at Bud Light. Their advertising promoted Miller Lite as having half as many carbohydrates as Bud Light. In May of 2004, Anheuser-Busch countered with its talking-lizard advertising that said Miller Lite was the Queen of Carbs (Ewing, 2004; St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2004). Miller filed a lawsuit claiming that Queen of Carbs was a disparaging statement that was misleading consumers to believe that Miller Lite was high in carbohydrates. Miller sought an injunction to prevent Anheuser-Busch from using that line in their advertising (Cancelada, 2004). Miller withdrew the lawsuit after seeing the sales of their products increase during the time the Bud Light ads were airing. Miller executives said that Miller Lite sales in supermarkets were up 17% over the previous year for the two week period surrounding the Memorial Day holiday in late May when the Bud Light advertising was running (St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2004).

Creating and using memetic subprofiles for consumer products

In contrast to the role that the sales force plays in generating the memetic profile for industrial products, when it comes to consumer products, that task shifts to the marketing staff, especially marketing research. The process for generating a memetic subprofile for consumer products would, essentially, be the same as for memetic profiles such as that shown for the University of Phoenix. The difference is that rather than using source materials such as annual Letters to Shareholders and speeches, the source material for memetic sub-profiles for consumer products would be competitor advertisements, sales promotion materials, information gathered directly from consumers via marketing research and the like. The set of memes gathered by examining advertising and from marketing research could be augmented by information from the sales force and marketing staff using the techniques for generating memetic sub-profiles for industrial products as described in the previous section.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

36

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

The question illustrated by this example is, What memes were being received by the consumer? Using memetic terminology, the assumption that calling Miller Lite The Queen of Carbs would implant a meme that Miller Lite was high in carbohydrates is not necessarily the meme that was received by the consumer. The increase in Miller Lite sales of 17% suggests that such a meme implantation approach may not have been successful. Perhaps the meme that the Bud Light ads conveyed as a result of their advertising was something else, such as, Miller Lite is as good as Bud Light. If so, it is surely is not what Anheuser-Busch intended. In consumer marketing, the intent of the advertiser is irrelevant. What matters is the memes received by the target consumers. For consumer products, marketing research can help track what is going on in the minds of consumers. Marketing research and other memetic intelligence, especially from the sales force, can then be fed into the marketing and strategic decision-making process. The memetic information could be used not only for understanding a competitors current strategies, but to predict their future strategies with techniques like competitor scenario development (Fahey, 1999).

Future directions for research

Memetics is a new concept in the fields of marketing and competitor intelligence. Several areas need additional research if CI and marketing are to capitalize on the potential of the emerging field of memetics. The following are three of the more important areas.

Relationship of memetics to the field of marketing

The effective use of memetics in CI is heavily dependent on advancements in the area of the use of memetics for marketing purposes. Because memetics deals with ideas and how they are transferred from one brain to another, one would think that memetics would be a major topic in the field of marketing, but it is not. More research is needed to accelerate the the-

oretical and practical aspects of using memes in marketing. The theoretical research on memetics in marketing is scant and needs to be greatly expanded. Only two articles with a clear theoretical orientation have been published (Williams, 2000; Marsden and Bollen, 1999). Marsden is the originator of meme maps, which graphically portray the meme-sets of segments of a potential market (Marsden, 2002). Two other articles include both theoretical and practical aspects of memetics (Gelb, 1997; Marsden, 1998). Although memetics has not been widely adopted by marketing theorists, it has been embraced by practitioners and consultants, mostly under the heading of viral marketing. However, viral marketing has a questionable linkage to memetics and lacks the conceptual foundation that one would expect of a major movement in the field of marketing. There are many articles and books on viral marketing, which practitioners have more or less discovered independently of memetic theory. Articles on viral marketing appear in Fortune (Kelly, 2000), Advertising Age (Barlow, 2000; Fitzgerald, 2001; Beeler, 2000), B to B (Ward, 2000), Marketing Magazine (Sandler, 2001), Sales and Marketing Management (Zimmerman, 2001), Marketing (Mazur, 2002), Brandweek (Taylor, 2003), and US News & World Report (Streisand, 1999). None of these articles mention memetics per se, but all mention that companies are rapidly adopting viral marketing. An article by Walker (2000) is an exception in that he links viral marketing to memetic marketing. Additional research is needed to clarify the relationship between viral marketing and memetic marketing. The field of marketing, to date, has been slow in recognizing the potential of the concept of memetics even though it has been around for a quarter of a century. More research is needed to accelerate the theoretical and practical aspects of using memes in marketing.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

37

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Linkage of memes to psychogaphic typologies

One of the promising ways to link memes and marketing is in the area of consumer psychographics. Marketing has used psychographics for many years. One of the leading approaches to psychographics is Values and Life Styles (VALS) which describes several distinct clusters of consumers based on life style and psychological characteristics (SRI Business Intelligence Consulting, 2004). VALS has not as yet been linked to memetics. Neither has the popular personality technique, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. However, Nolan (1999) has linked competitive intelligence to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Quenk, 1999) by suggesting a variation of the Myers-Briggs could be used to generate a psychological profile of the leaders of competitor companies. Searches of the Internet and library databases by the author reflect no link of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to memetics. A psychographic categorizing system that has been linked to memetics is the research of the late Dr. Clare Graves (1970). Graves describes seven levels of psychological evolution, each with its own unique way of thinking and acting. While Graves work occurred before Dawkins introduced the concept of memetics in 1976, some of Graves disciples have subsequently attempted to make such a connection. In their book Spiral Dynamics, Beck and Cowan, (1996) have relabeled the Gravesian types as vMemes, which the authors say is short for value memes. However, this categorization seems to be only partially correct, as each Gravesian type most likely reflects the action of both genes and memes, rather than just memes as the designation vMemes implies. In addition, Beck and Cowans work is not business oriented, so additional research would be necessary to more specifically describe how Gravesian psychological types and memetic theories are related, and to clarify implications for marketing and competitive intelligence.

Utilization of meme-based CI
An important area for future research is how meme-based intelligence would be utilized in the decision-making process. The issue of effective utilization of any type of intelligence has been illuminated by the business intelligence benchmarking study conducted by the American Productivity and Quality Center (Prescott and Herring, 1998). In spite of several examples of effective utilization of CI in some organizations identified in the study, CI is underused and/or misused in many organizations. The problems related to the use of intelligence have been described in both business and government. In business CI, several authors have raised the conceptual question of how CI could or should be effectively used in decision-making processes (Ganesh, Miree and Prescott, 2003; Hall, 2001). Similar issues regarding the ineffective utilization of available intelligence exist in governmental organizations (Feder, 2000; Herring, 1999). Practitioners have illustrated some of the problems of intelligence utilization in more concrete terms. Clarke (1999) has observed that, Decisionmakers are always more comfortable with intelligence that confirms the conventional wisdom. For example, when confronted with information that does not conform to an image set, a decision-maker may tend to misunderstand it, to twists its meaning to make it consistent, explain it away, deny it, or even ignore it. Cullen (2000) says, Our decision makers may listen, but often we get the feeling they dont embrace the information. They may be skeptical, dismissive, impatient, or they may just miss the point. Business is not alone when it comes to poor utilization of available intelligence. Government has essentially the same problems (Feder, 2000; Herring, 1999) with one major difference: Many of the governments intelligence failures are more public than similar failures in the private sector. One example of poor utilization of available information in a governmental agency can be seen in the public accounts of the

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

38

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Columbia shuttle disaster of early 2003 (Columbia Accident Investigation Board, 2003). The space shuttle Columbia was launched on January 16, 2003 for a 16 day stay in space. Many engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and its contractors thought that a wing of the Columbia probably suffered substantial damage as it was launched. The engineers raised those concerns early in the flight, but NASAs management dismissed those concerns claiming there was no hard evidence that the shuttle was damaged. In an attempt to gather information that would clarify whether there was damage to the wing, several days into the flight one of the NASA engineers requested that the Department of Defense use one of its satellites (as it had on a previous shuttle flight) to take pictures of the Columbia to ascertain if it was in fact damaged. However, when management learned of the request for the satellite photos the request was cancelled on the grounds that they, NASAs middle managers, did not believe there was damage to the shuttle. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board (2003) found that, in fact, the wing was damaged on liftoff, which caused the Columbia to disintegrate upon reentry. All seven astronauts on board were killed. The investigation boards report was very critical of NASA managements extremely poor handling of the available information about likely damage. The Board concluded that had management acted in a timely fashion on the available engineering information about probable damage, a rescue mission using the Atlantis shuttle might have been possible. Perhaps the biggest public failure to use intelligence in our lifetime was the inability of the CIA and FBI to connect the dots regarding the impending attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The report of the commission that investigated the attacks indicated that if available information had been effectively utilized, there was a good possibility the devastating attacks could have been prevented (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks, 2004).

The problem of utilization of intelligence is prevalent in both business and governmental organizations because all organizations use essentially the same decision-making process that is rooted in a linearrational meme-set that is not well suited for the task. While that meme-set is good for some purposes, such as operating a top-down organization, it is not well adapted to accepting and processing intelligence. It appears that this linear-rational meme-set is an extremely good replicator that virtually locks organizations into behavior that is inimical to their longterm survival. One stream of research that explains the organizational behavior that leads to poor utilization of intelligence is the work of Argyris and Schon (1978). Their research indicates that over 90% of organizations operate in a single loop mode, which is characterized by poor ability to surface and validate assumptions, a my mind is made up, dont confuse me with facts attitude, the camouflaging of bad news so as not to upset higher management, punishing troublemakers who dont adhere to the party line, a win/lose ethic, and the inability to admit that such behavior exists in their organization (Argyris and Schon, 1978; Argyris, 1977 and 1996). Research is needed on what to do about this pervasive single loop meme-set that impedes the collection and utilization of competitive intelligence. Argyris himself reports only moderate success with his efforts to change single loop cultures to double loop, e.g., the ability to openly question underlying assumptions and to use facts rather than subjective opinions for decisions (Argyris, 1977; Argyris, 1996). One approach for dealing with single loop cultures that has been explored by OGorman (2005b) is to use a technique developed by Mason and Mitroff (1981) called Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing. Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing does not attempt to change the single loop meme-set, but to only temporarily implant a pocket of double loop behavior within the single loop organization for a specific decision (OGorman, 2005b).

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

39

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

More research is needed to determine if it is feasible or desirable to change the linear-rational single loop meme-set to a double loop meme-set, or whether it is better to develop decision-making techniques and processes such as Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing that would effectively utilize intelligence, but within the overall culture of a single loop organization. In summary, more research is needed on these three areas. Unfortunately, the field of CI cannot expect that other business fields will forge ahead with a research agenda that will be of assistance to CI. For all practical purposes, marketing theory is ignoring memetics. Neither is the field of psychology likely to be of any help in linking memetics to usable psychographic typologies. Similarly, the field of organizational behavior seems to be itself so steeped in linear-rational single loop concepts that it is unlikely to be of much help in doing something about dysfunctional decision processes that inhibit the effective use of intelligence. But as the saying goes (a meme, by the way), Every problem is an opportunity. Perhaps this is the right time for the field of CI to launch a significant research agenda focused on memetics.

Since other fields of business and the social sciences have little interest in memetics, this paper recommends that the field of CI institute a major research agenda focused on memetics. However, it will take years before that research is available to practitioners. In the interim, this paper has presented specific activities that could be used today to generate memetic profiles of competitors. The memes and meta-memes embodied in competitors top management would be extracted by CI analyses of speeches, annual reports, media interviews, and the like. Memetic profiles would also be prepared for key competitior products, with the specific methods determined by whether the product is an advertising-centric consumer product or a sales force-centric institutional product.
For consumer products, marketing research would take the lead in identifying competitor memes in the minds of consumers. Sales reps would provide additional insights regarding competitor memes and meta-memes that exist within the product distribution system. For industrial products, it is the sales force that would be the primary collector of competitor memes. If the organization has a CI function, it would coordinate with the sales reps regarding the identification of competitor memes and metamemes using focused questions of customers, and where possible, of competitors sales reps.

Conclusion
There is growing evidence that human behavior is a function of genes and memes (Aunger, 2001 and 2002; Dennett, 1991 and 1995). In the field of CI, we are interested in the memes of competitors top managers because we know those memes will be replicating and driving the behavior of their organizations. This memetic perspective helps illuminate why competitors behave the way they do, and provide insights into how they will behave in the future. This paper suggests an integrated way to tie memetics to marketing and competitive intelligence. However, more research is needed to elucidate the relationship of memes, CI and marketing, especially with a focus on the how memetics relates to the psychographics of consumer behavior. Research is also needed on the utilization of meme-based intelligence.

The memetic profile of competitors, successes in countering competitor memes, along with other competitive intelligence, would form the basis for memetic action plans at the corporate as well as product levels. The net benefit is that those organizations that excel in identifying competitor memes and implementing effective counter-meme strategies will have a competitive advantage in the market place.

References
Apollo Group. (2003). Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2003.pdf.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

40

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Apollo Group. (2004a). Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2004.pdf. Apollo Group. (2004b). Apollo Group History. http://www.apollogrp.edu/History.aspx. Argyris, C. (1977). Double Loop Learning in Organizations, Harvard Business Review (SeptemberOctober): 115-125. Argyris, C. (1996). Actionable Knowledge: Intent Versus Actuality, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(December): 441-444. Argyris, C. and D.A. Schon. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Aunger, R. (1999). Culture Vultures, The Sciences 39(5): 36-42. Aunger, R. [ed.] (2001). Darwinizing Culture: The Status of Memetics as a Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Aunger, R. (2002). The Electric Meme. New York: The Free Press. Barlow, R. (2000). The Net Upends Tenets of Loyalty Marketing, Advertising Age (April 17): 46. Beck, D. and C. Cowan. (1996). Spiral Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Business. Beeler, A. (2000). Virus without a Cure, Advertising Age (April 17): 54. Blackmore, S. (1999). The Meme Machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brodie, R. (1996). Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme. Seattle, WA: Integral Press. Cancelada, G. (2004). Fight Between A-B, Miller Spills into Court, St. Louis Post Dispatch (May 28): C2. Clarke, J.L. (1999). Why Good People Make Bad Decisions - - Despite Great Intelligence! Competitive Intelligence 2(4): 15-18. Columbia Accident Investigation Board. (2003). Columbia Accident Investigation Board Final Report, http://www.caib.us.

Cullen, S.E. (2000). Communicating Complex Issues to Decision Makers: A Patent Example, Competitive Intelligence 3(3): 23-30. Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dawkins, R. (1998). Unweaving the Rainbow. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little Brown. Dennett, D. (1995). Darwins Dangerous Idea. London: Penguin. Ewing, J. (2004). Beer Wars Come to a Head, Business Week (May 24). http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_21/b3884086.htm. Fahey, L. (1999). Competitor Scenarios: Projecting a Rivals Marketplace Strategy, Competitive Intelligence Review 10(2): 65-85. Feder, S. (2000). Overcoming Mindsets: What Corporations Can Learn from Government Intelligence Failures, Competitive Intelligence Review 11(3): 28-36. Fitzgerald, K. (2001). Viral Marketing Breaks Through, Advertising Age (June 25): 10. Galbraith, J. (1983). Strategy and Organizational Planning, Human Resource Management 22(Spring/Summer): 63-77. Ganesh, U., Miree, C. and J. Prescott. (2003). Competitive Intelligence Field Research: Moving the Field Forward by Setting a Research Agenda, Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management 1(1): 1-12. Gelb, B. (1997). Creating Memes While Creating Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research 37(6): 5759. Graves, C. (1970). Levels of Existence, Journal of Humanistic Psychology 10(2): 131-155. Hall, C. (2001). The Intelligent Puzzle, Competitive Intelligence Review 12(4): 3-14. Harkleroad, D. (1998). Ostriches and Eagles II, Competitive Intelligence Review 9(1): 13-19. Herring, J. (1999). Key Intelligence Topics: A Process to Identify and Define Intelligence Needs, Competitive Intelligence Review 10(2): 4-14.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

41

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Kelly, E. (2000). This Is the One Virus You Want to Spread, Fortune (November 27): 297-300. Lynch, A. (1996). Thought Contagion: How Beliefs Spread through Society. New York: Basic Books. Marsden, P. (1998). Memetics: A New Paradigm for Understanding Customer Behavior and Influence, Marketing Intelligence and Planning 16(6): 363. Marsden, P. (2002). What Healthy-Living Means to Consumers, International Journal of Market Research 44(2): 223-234. Marsden, P. and J. Bollen. (1999). Help Advertising Evolve: Clone Consumer Thought Patterns, AdMap 34(3): 37-39. Mason, R.O. and I.I. Mitroff. (1981). Challenging Strategic Planning Assumptions. New York: Wiley. Mazur, L. (2002). Firms Cant Do Viral Marketing: It Is Done to You, Marketing (June 27): 16. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks. (2004). The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. New York: Norton & Company. Nelson, T. (2004). Letter to our Shareholders, The Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: The Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/AnnualReports/2004.pdf. Neuendorf, K. (2001). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Nolan, J. (1999). Confidential: Uncover Your Competitors Top Business Secrets Legally and Quicklyand Protect Your Own. New York: HarperCollins. OGorman, D. (2005a). Is the Meme Meme Replicating Itself? Unpublished research. OGorman, D. (2005b). Strategic Decision-making: Problems and Prospects, Proceedings of the North American Management Society Conference 2005. Chicago, IL: North American Management Society. Oxford English Dictionary. (2005). http://www.askoxford.com/?view=uk. Powell, T. and C. Allgaier. (1999). Enhancing Sales and Marketing Effectiveness Through Competitive Intelligence, Competitive Intelligence Review 9(4): 29-41.

Prescott, J. and J. Herring. (1998). Leveraging Information for Action: A Look into the Competitive and Business Intelligence Consortium Benchmarking Study, Competitive Intelligence Review 9(1): 4-12. Quenk, N. (1999). Essentials of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Assessment. New York: Wiley. Ridley, M. (2003). Nature Via Nurture. New York: Harper Collins. Sandler, R. (2001). How to Create an Infectious Viral Campaign, Marketing Magazine (February 19): 14. Sathe, V. (1985). Culture and Related Corporate Realities. Homewood, IL: Irwin. Saxby, C., Nitse, P. and P. Dishman. (2000). Managers Mental Categorizations of Competitors, Competitive Intelligence Review 11(2): 31-38. Schein, E. (1983). The Role of the Founder in Creating Organizational Culture, Organizational Dynamics (Summer): 13-28. Sperling, J. (1999). Letter to Shareholders, Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/1999.pdf. Sperling, J. (2000). Letter to Shareholders, Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2000.pdf. Sperling, J. (2001). Letter to Shareholders, Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2001.pdf. Sperling, J. (2002). Letter to Shareholders, Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/Annual-Reports/2002.pdf. Sperling, J. and T. Nelson. (2003). Letter to Shareholders, Apollo Group Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: Apollo Group. http://www.apollogrp.edu/AnnualReports/2003.pdf. SRI Business Intelligence Consulting. (2004). About VALS. .http://www.sricbi.com/VALS/. St. Louis Post Dispatch. (2004). Beer Wars, (June 16): C-10. Streisand, B. (1999). The Price of Good Buzz, US News & World Report (September 27): 48.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

42

David OGorman Memes, CI and Marketing: A Preliminary Framework

Subramanian, R. and S. Ishak. (1998). Competitor Analysis Practices of U.S. Companies: An Empirical Investigation, Management International Review 38 (1): 7-23. Taylor, J. (2003). Word of Mouth Is Where Its At, Brandweek (June 2): 26. Vella, C. and J. McGonagle. (2000). Profiling in Competitive Analysis, Competitive Intelligence Review 11(2): 20-30. Walker, R. (2000). Got a Replication Strategy, MC Technology Marketing Intelligence (April): 102-104. Walle, A. (1999a). From Marketing Research to Competitive Intelligence: Useful Generalization or Loss of Focus? Management Decision 37(6): 519-525. Walle, A. (1999b). Corporate Configurations and Competitive Intelligence: Understanding Organizations as a Distance, Competitive Intelligence Review 10 (4): 5564. Ward, E. (2000). Viral Marketing Involves Serendipity, Not Planning, B to B (July 17): 26. Williams, R. (2000). The Business of Memes: Memetic Marketing Possibilities of Marketing and Management, Management Decision 38(4): 272-79. Zimmerman, R. (2001). Catch the Bug, Sales and Marketing Management (February): 78-82.

Journal of Competitive Intelligence and Management Volume 3 Number 2 Fall 2005

43