argument that 4P’s mix is too product oriented. Critics ofthis standpoint (Lauterborm, 1990) hold that a successful marketing plan mustplace the customers in the centre of the marketing plan. Thus, instead of theproduct-centric nature of the 4p’s one is encouraged to purse acustomer-focused strategy which would take as its focus customer needs, convenience,communication and customer’s cost (Lauterborm, 1990). In his defense, the needto move from product to customer oriented model is as a result of the dynamicnature of the current marketplaces and customers (Constantinides, 2006) who arenow informed of the best market offers for them by electronic and competingdevices. Hence it 4p’s as a marketing mix has outlived its days as the mostefficient and relevant for today’s marketers. In a survey carriedout in 1992 using UK’s MarketingEducation Group (MEG) Conference participants and the European MarketingAcademy (EMAC) Conference participants as respondents (mostly professors,associate professors, lecturers and research fellows of marketing and/oreconomics). It was inferred by Rafiq & Ahmed (1995) that 85% of therespondents felt dissatisfaction with the 4Ps, they felt that the 4Ps conceptwas deficient in some respects as a pedagogic tool.
The respondents saw 7ps asa better model citing comprehensiveness as the most frequently mentioned strengthof the 7Ps model. It was also thought to be more refined and detailed than the4Ps model and was seen as providing a broader perspective. Some respondentsexplicitly mentioned the inclusion of participants/people as a strength.
Theprocess variable was also mentioned but not as frequently the participants/people variable. The 7Ps mixwas also thought to be more of a modelthan the 4Ps mix. The standardization of the mix by extending the 7Psframework to areas other than serviceswas also mentioned.