Fashion Marketing

TTPR_A_868677.
3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
Textile Progress
Vol. 45, Nos. 2-3, 2013, 182207
Fashion marketing
Liz Barnes*
School of Materials, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

(Received 25 July 2013; final version received 20 November 2013)
This issue of Textile Progress provides a critical literature review and reflection relating to
academic research in the field of fashion marketing. As the topic has not been reviewed
before in Textile Progress, the paper takes the concepts of marketing and fashion in turn,
exploring the literature from its origins to the present day and then considers how and why
these two concepts have become merged to form a discrete academic research theme.
The exploration of marketing includes a discussion of the origins of the marketing
concept which emerged in the 1950s alongside the growth in mass consumerism. The
paper discusses the ubiquitous marketing mix theory and explains how research in
marketing shifted its focus in the 1980s and 1990s as new paradigms developed, and
their applicability to the marketing concept were debated.
The concept of fashion is considered in terms of the context of historical research on
fashion, for example, from the sociological or psychological perspective, and how the
concept of fashion can be considered both academically and commercially.
The review then goes on to evaluate the concept of fashion marketing as a discrete area
for academic research, arguing that it has distinct theoretical perspectives from those
of pure marketing or fashion theory, and culminating in a review of contemporary
research in the field of fashion marketing, specifically that relating to fast fashion and
digital fashion marketing.
Keywords: marketing; fashion marketing; fashion; fast fashion; digital fashion
1. Introduction
This paper responds to the need for an exploration into the role of fashion marketing in
the context of textiles research. Textiles as an academic subject has a long history in the
UK, born from the thriving textiles industry of the industrial revolution, and textiles
research has contributed to huge innovations in science and technology. As a result of the
shift in the manufacturing of garments to developing economies as well as the growth in
wealth and consumerism witnessed in the 1980s, the emphasis of the textiles industry in
the UK changed, with increased focus on the fashion, design and branding elements of
garment production. This shift in the industry was reflected in universities, as courses in
textiles marketing grew in popularity through the 1980s and 1990s, with increasing
emphasis on the fashion aspects of textiles. As the number of courses in fashion market-
ing has grown, so too has fashion marketing as an academic subject. Indeed, Richard
Jones, founding editor of the Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, introduced
the journal in the 1980s (initially titled the Hollings Apparel Industry Review, an internal
*Email: [email protected]
ISSN 0040-5167 print / ISSN 1754-2278 online

2014 The Textile Institute
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405167.2013.868677
http://www.tandfonline.com
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
Textile Progress 183
journal produced by the Department of Clothing Design and Technology at what is now
the Manchester Metropolitan University) in direct response for the need to plug the gap
and develop a base of research literature on which to underpin courses related to market-
ing in textiles and clothing [1]. Of course, the Journal of Fashion Marketing and Manage-
ment is not the only journal to publish research in the field of fashion marketing. Since the
1990s, papers on fashion marketing have increasingly been found in textiles journals as
well as in pure marketing journals and beyond, in publications on retailing, geography,
psychology and sociology. Now that publications in the subject have reached a critical
mass, it seems an opportune time to reflect on research in the field of fashion marketing,
particularly within the context of where it sits in the broader textiles research agenda.
This conceptual paper explores research in fashion marketing for the wider textiles
research community. Searches using the term fashion on Google will return more than
335 million results including, amongst other topics, clothing, retail, television, media,
education, art, music and culture; however, clothing and footwear are what most people
accept as being intrinsic to the fashion industry [2], and for the purposes of this article,
the terms fashion and fashion marketing are used in relation to the marketing of garments.
The fashion industry is therefore a hugely important sector for textiles, since all aspects of
textiles and garment production account for a huge proportion of the overall textiles
industry. Thus fashion marketing is a significant component of the broad study of textiles.
Fashion marketing has evolved as an academic subject over the last 20 years; yet, its defi-
nition as a concept has not been explored widely. In its simplest terms, fashion marketing
is an extension or more focused application of generic marketing. The first part of this
paper explores marketing and fashion in turn.
The term fashion marketing is then introduced and is followed by a deeper discussion
about research in marketing and fashion. The paper then evaluates fashion marketing as a
research field, evaluating the meaning of fashion marketing as a concept, identifying the
key research themes in fashion marketing and exploring the future research agenda within
the context of the subject and beyond.
2. Marketing
Marketing as an academic subject in its own right has been seriously studied for around
six decades, garnering much attention and popularity as an academic subject following
Theodore Levitts seminal paper Marketing Myopia published in the Harvard Business
Review in 1960 in which he introduced the concept that firms would be more successful
if they focused on identifying and satisfying customer needs [3].
2.1. The marketing concept

The marketing concept evolved quickly following Levitts influential work and was typi-
cally referred to as marketing philosophy, total marketing or integrated marketing;
but whichever interpretation was favoured, central to the marketing concept was the need
to place consumers as the centre of all business planning, with a shift away from emphasis
on production and sales towards consumer needs and profit, providing a strategic link
between producer and consumer [4]. During the early years of marketing study, academ-
ics and practitioners tended to debate both the marketing concept and the marketing
philosophy, with the philosophy being defined as a long-term viewpoint or umbrella
vision for the whole business and the concept as the operational implication of the mar-
keting philosophy [5].
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
184 L. Barnes
2.2. The marketing mix

In these early years of academic research into marketing, Neil H. Borden, professor of
marketing at the Harvard Business School, introduced a pivotal idea to marketing acade-
mia with his theoretical concept of the marketing mix in which he described marketers
as being managers of a mix of marketing procedures and policies, a mixer of
ingredients, a term he coined from work by another Harvard professor, James Culliton.
Borden [6] argued that in this context, in implementing the marketing philosophy or con-
cept, a marketer managed a marketing mix of internal operations, all of which would be
subject to external forces. In this early vision of the marketing mix, Borden [6] identified
elements of the marketing mix as the following:
product planning,
pricing,
branding,
channels of distribution,
personal selling,
advertising,
promotions,
packaging,
display,
servicing,
physical handling,
fact finding and analysis,
all of which would be subject to a series of forces including consumer behaviour, industry
behaviour, competitors and regulation. Borden [6] suggested that the marketing mix con-
cept would provide a useful tool to enable a clearer understanding of what marketing is
and the interrelated nature of its activities. Over time, many academics developed and
simplified the idea of the marketing mix, and indeed the idea of the marketing mix
remains today and is used prolifically in marketing academia. The most enduring model
of the marketing mix is that which was first proposed by McCarthy (1960, cited in Water-
schoot and van den Bulte [7]) who organised the ingredients of the mix into four classes:
product, price, place and promotion, describing this formula as the 4Ps. Early research
into the concept of the marketing mix focused on the mix as a series of policies and proce-
dures, but a more modern interpretation of the marketing mix is focused on its use as a
strategic tool for businesses to achieve their marketing objectives [8]. Despite new and
arguably more sophisticated perspectives and angles on marketing, the 4Ps (comprising
product, place, price and promotion) of the marketing mix have remained an indisputable
paradigm [9] in marketing research for nearly 60 years.
2.3. New paradigms for research in marketing the IMP approach

and relationship marketing
Marketing as a business and academic concept emerged in the mainstream in the 1950s
and 1960s on the back of an explosion of consumer wealth and economic growth in the
post-war era. It seems natural that the focus of the early marketing research tended to
refer to consumer markets and consumer goods. As marketing research developed over
the following decades, there was a shift in emphasis away from consumer products and
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
the marketing mix concept, to industrial marketing and services marketing. The interac-
tion/network approach to industrial marketing dominated much of the academic research
into marketing in the 1970s and 1980s. Much of this work originated from a group of aca-
demics from the Uppsala University in Sweden who argued that in industrial marketing,
businesses operate in a network of organisations that interact with each other, usually
over a long period of time, with organisations working together and adapting over time to
facilitate mutually beneficial exchanges. The interaction approach developed by the
Industrial Marketing and Purchasing Group (IMP Group) in the late 1970s focused on
organisational marketing, not as a dyadic relationship between two organisations, but as a
pre-existing network of relationships, available for organisations to exploit however they
wish. This developed into what was termed an interaction approach [10]. Easton [11]
suggests that this new approach worked outside the traditional marketing arena. It focused
more on the space between organisations, and so, in other words, looked at the totality
of relationships between organisations involved in production, distribution and use of
goods and services in an entire industrial system [11].
The interaction approach is based on a number of other factors [12]:
The buyer and seller are both active participants in the market.
There is a close, complex, long-term interaction between the buyer and seller. Mar-
keters and buyers need to be more involved in maintaining the relationship, than
just with making the purchase.
Links between buyers and sellers become institutionalised whereby each party will
perform the roles expected.
Previous purchases, mutual evaluation and the associated relationship, especially
between companies in the case of infrequently purchased products.
However, Ford [10] argued that there were several issues raised by this interaction
approach:
There may be long periods of interaction before the purchase.

The initial purchase may be a forerunner for others.
Previous interaction will influence future purchases.
The focus on marketing in an organisational context continued to dominate the aca-

demic study of marketing in the 1980s and 1990s and the interaction approach evolved
into the concept of relationship marketing. Buttle [13, p. 1] suggested that . . .the 1990s
represent the genesis of personalised marketing, in which knowledge about individual
customers is used to guide highly-focused marketing strategies. In addition Baker [14]
argued that the relationship marketing debate represented an addition to marketing theory
and should lead academics to consider whether relationship marketing would replace tra-
ditional marketing management theory and potentially make the marketing concept
obsolete.
Relationship marketing developed through a desire to change business practice from
an atmosphere of conflict to one of cooperation and collaboration. Relationship marketing
was perhaps a natural progression from the IMP approach, whereby the pre-existing rela-
tionship between organisations of the IMP approach, is pursued to maintain customer loy-
alty by strategically managing the relationship. In fact, Turnbull [15] described the IMP
approach as being the reason for the wealth of interest in relationship marketing.
However, despite being a progression from the network approach, some argued that
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
186 L. Barnes
relationship marketing and the network theory had little in common; Mattsson [16]
suggested that the IMP approach focused on relationships as they are, rather than as they
should be, whereas the relationship marketing approach tended to focus on the manage-
ment of relationship life cycles. Relationship marketing had a more strategic and proac-
tive role than the network approach. In other words, in relationship marketing, the
organisation makes an active decision to make relationship marketing a strategy of the
organisation. However, Blois [17] disputed this and suggests that many organisations
have been involved in relationship marketing for years, having never realised or necessar-
ily employed it as a strategy.
So it can be seen that relationship marketing had moved the marketing paradigm from
basic transactions between organisations to an emphasis on the importance of long-term
customer retention. In addition, as discussed earlier, relationship marketing superseded
the IMP approach. Relationship marketing theory suggests that there must be a definite
strategy to exploit the relationship for long-term benefit and competitive advantage. This
occurred because, although the IMP approach included an element of relationship man-
agement, the IMP Group tended to assume that relationships just exist, whereas relation-
ship marketing acknowledges that they must be viewed strategically to gain competitive
benefit. Gummesson [18] explained that in his relationship marketing theory, the 30Rs
approach is a gradual extension to work undertaken by the IMP Group. The 30Rs incor-
porated relationships, networks and interaction [18]. In addition to the natural develop-
ment of research in this field, relationship marketing was considered to have significant
economic benefits because it was about maintaining existing customers by providing
added value to the core product, for example, in terms of technological benefit, knowl-
edge-related benefit, informational benefit or social benefit [9]. The crux of this argument
was supported by Buttle [13] who suggested that it costs organisations more resource to
attract a new customer, rather than maintain an existing customer, and the longer the rela-
tionship the more profitable it would be. The concept was neatly summarised by Gordon
[19, p. 9]:
Relationship marketing is the on-going process of identifying and creating new value with
individual customers and then sharing the benefits from this over a lifetime of association. It
involves the understanding, focusing and management of on-going collaboration between
suppliers and selected customers for mutual value creation and sharing through interdepen-
dence and organisational alignment.
Mattsson [16] stressed that relationship marketing was more than just a marketing
strategy aimed at increasing customer loyalty, satisfaction and retention. Relationship
marketing really meant a true interaction, over time, between parties, with a relatively
high mutual dependence and a primary consideration for how individual relationships are
interconnected in networks. Gummesson [20, p. 24] provided a more complex definition
for relationship marketing in his total relationship marketing theory. He defined it as:
. . . marketing based on relationships, networks and interaction, recognising that marketing is

embedded in the total management of the networks of the selling organisation, the market
and society. It is directed to long-term win-win relationships with individual customers, and
value is jointly created between the parties involved. It is made more tangible through the
thirty market, mega and nano relationships, the 30 Rs. [20, p. 24]
Relationship marketing, which dominated research in the 1990s, although derived

from a foundation in organisational marketing, extended the concept of relationships with
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
customers to individual consumers, and today we see a resurgence in interest in relation-

ship marketing as businesses strive towards the concept of mass customisation. Aspects
of research in relationship marketing moved into supply chain management and this
remains a key feature of contemporary research in marketing, to the extent that relation-
ship marketing tends to be regarded as a subject in its own right, distinct in many ways
from its parent subject of marketing. Interestingly, the major theme that dominated the
relationship marketing research was focused on whether relationship marketing consti-
tuted a paradigm shift in the marketing concept [9,14,18,20,21]; although research moved
away from this debate in the 2000s, it was true to say the marketing concept paradigm did
not comfortably fit this model of relationship marketing, and at various stages new para-
digms for marketing have been proposed and the marketing mix has been subject to criti-
cism. For example, Waterschoot and van den Bulte [7] argued that the classifications of
the 4Ps lacked basis and that they could not be mutually exclusive. Despite this, the con-
cept of marketing remains relevant and remains a core component of the current Char-
tered Institute of Marketing (UK) definition of marketing: Marketing is the management
process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements
profitably [22]; Kotler [8] defines marketing management as . . .the art and science of
choosing target markets and getting, keeping, and growing customers through creating,
delivering, and communicating superior customer value [8, p. 9]; and the American Mar-
keting Association recently updated their definition in July 2013 and now define market-
ing as . . .the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating,
delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and
society at large [23].
3. Fashion
Fashion is defined as being something with short-term popularity applied to product cate-
gories (clothing, cars, food, technology, etc.), lifestyles and business sectors, and can be
used in describing the characteristics of an individual; for example, a person described as
being fashionable would be someone who embraces all aspects of what is considered
popular at any given time. Fashion as an academic subject has its foundation in sociology
and humanities, for example, dress and culture, historical trends in dress and costume and
in the context of dress and self-identity and so on. In the context of commercial and busi-
ness-oriented research, fashion has only recently been considered as an academic subject,
in line with the growth in post-war consumerism. For the purposes of this paper, fashion
is examined from the point of view of fashion business rather than in the broader socio-
logical context, and with emphasis on fashion clothing.
3.1. The concept of fashion

The concept of fashion is such that it remains popular for a limited period of time,
although this fixed period could be a matter of days, weeks, months or years. In fact entire
decades have been linked to the clothing fashionable in a particular decade, for example,
the 1970s disco chic or the 1960s hippy style. Regardless of its duration, something
which is in fashion, will by definition, inevitably lose popularity at some point to be
replaced by a new fashion, and the cycle begins again. This notion of a cycle relates
closely to research in the field of sociology by Rogers on the theory of the diffusion of
innovation and to the product life cycle (PLC) model. Indeed this link has been estab-
lished by the work of Midgley and Willis (1979, cited in Evans [24]).
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
188 L. Barnes
3.2. Fashion and the diffusion of innovation

Rogers [25] is widely considered to be the most well-known researcher and theorist on the
diffusion of innovation and his book, Diffusion of Innovations, first published in 1962, is
now in its fifth edition [26]; Whilst Rogers is considered to be the seminal theorist on the
diffusion of innovations; his work has developed over the past 40 years and he now incor-
porates the work of many other innovation diffusion scholars into his diffusion of
innovation theory. As Lundblad [27] highlights, Rogers fifth edition [26] contains
approximately 1000 different citations to other scholars published research and literature
related to diffusion of innovation. The diffusion of innovation theory purported by Rog-
ers [26] seeks to explain how something new (a product, idea, technology, concept, etc.)
is taken up or adopted by a group of individuals which could be a neighbourhood, soci-
ety, country, club, etc. and provided classifications of adopter categories by which individ-
uals may be described, in terms of his or her time of adoption in the diffusion of
innovation model.
3.2.1. The innovator: venturesome

The group consists of those eager to try new ideas. The fundamentals of this group are
substantial income, knowledge of technologies and the desire for risk. Innovators tend to
be cosmopolites socially and circulate new ideas.
3.2.2. Early adopters: respect

The early adopters are the group seen to be the successful judges and users of innovations;
other potential adopters tend to seek advice and information from this category. Unlike
the innovators they are part of an integrated local social system.
3.2.3. Early majority: deliberate

The early majority group embraces innovations only just before the average member of
the social system. This group may deliberate over the idea before complete adoption and
their adoption period is somewhat longer than the above categories.
3.2.4. Late majority: sceptical

The late majority group adopts ideas just after the average member of the social system
and their adoption may be a response to social pressure. Those in this classification do not
adopt until the majority of others have done so.
3.2.5. The laggards: tradition

The laggards are the last to accept the new idea. This group is very traditional and decisions
are often made with regard to proceeding generations. While the laggards are engaged in
adopting the new idea, the innovators may already be engaging with another innovation.
By contrast, product life cycle (PLC) theory is a separate theoretical concept grounded
in marketing theory, which models the sales of a product through its lifetime. It is repre-
sented, mirroring the behaviour of Rogers adopter categories, by a normal distribution
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
curve, representing an initial slow growth of sales as consumers become aware of the
product, followed by rapid growth and then a maturity phase whereby the product has
achieved sustained sales which finally proceed to decline [28]. This profile follows the
pattern of a fashion trend. By linking the life cycle of a fashion trend to Rogers classifi-
cation [24] of adopters categories, it is possible to gain some understanding of the types
of consumers buying in to a new fashion, and the stages at which they do it. The catego-
ries of adoption were based on a normal distribution curve; therefore, the early majority
and late majority categories might represent a typical mass market fashion response.
The preliminary stage in initiating a trend is that of the creation or design stage in
which a new fashion style is invented and introduced to the consumer. Freathy [29] notes
that in fashion, designers, celebrities and sub-cultural factors typically lead this first phase
and may therefore be classified as the innovator adopter. As those most interested in
fashion look to the designers and celebrities, the fashion is adopted by leading consumers,
often referred to as fashion leaders, fashion innovators or fashion-conscious consumers.
They initiate progression of the fashion by being the first to adopt and exhibit a new style
within their social group, a parallel to Rogers early adopter. As increasing numbers of
consumers (fashion followers) buy into a trend, there is an increase in adoption, endowing
the fashion with wider social awareness. The style is, however, is still considered new by
the mainstream consumer. The early majority adopter embraces the fashion before the
average consumer but there is maintenance of extensive attention and interest among
others. By the time the fashion gains a larger amount of social acceptance and is adopted
by varying social groups, the new fashion is well established and conventional; it has
been accepted by the majority and can therefore be linked to the late majority adopter
category. It is now a mass market fashion trend. By this point in the PLC (or trend life
cycle), those who are fashion innovators and early adopters have already moved onto the
next fashion and the cycle has started again. The final phase is decline and obsolescence
in which the fashion has lost its appeal. Decline in use occurs as new styles are introduced
and the fashion is then accepted as an addition to socially saturated fashions. It may be at
this moment that the laggard buys into the fashion, and arguably represents the point at
which the fashion is no longer fashionable! The length of time and speed with which a
fashion will move from introduction through to maturity phase will depend on a whole
variety of issues such as wearability of the trend, mass appeal, who the early adopters
were and the extent to which retailers were able to source and distribute the trend in
response to changing consumer demand. Some fashions, for example, the fashion for
denim, last for years or decades, and in the fashion sector are referred to as classics,
whilst other fashions move through the cycle very quickly and may only last a matter of
weeks before reaching decline. This pattern of high-speed progression through the life
cycle tends to be referred to as a fashion fad, for example, the underwear as outerwear
style.
Although studies into the typologies of adopter categories remain inconclusive [30],
traditional characteristics of adopter categories suggest that opinion leaders are important
in the diffusion and adoption of fashion [24]. There have been mixed findings about the
characteristics of adopter categories; findings have tended to suggest that fashion innova-
tors and early adopters are young, outgoing and have status in social networks (Katz &
Lazerfeld, 1955; Midgley & Wills, 1979, both cited in Evans [24]). Furthermore, young
consumers are considered to be more fashion-oriented than older consumers [24]. How-
ever, trends in the marketplace suggest that consumers are increasingly remaining inter-
ested in fashion for longer, meaning age is becoming less relevant, although orientation to
fashion may change. In the context of diffusion of a fashion trend, Cholachatpinyo et al.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
190 L. Barnes
[31] consider two groups of fashion consumers: innovators and followers. Fashion innova-
tors tend to be confident about fashion, uninfluenced by social groups or marketing activi-
ties and like to wear new trends but do not like wearing the same as others. Fashion
followers on the other hand are radically influenced by others, by marketing strategies
and by the media, and are less confident in their fashion choices and styling and are likely
to adopt a fashion only once it has been around for a while or when many others have
adopted it [31]. However, these characteristics imply that there are two distinct types of
consumers those that are interested/confident in fashion and those that are not, although
increasingly these stereotypes could be challenged. For example, the expansion of fash-
ion-associated media has potentially provided women of all adopter categories with
increasing interest and confidence in fashion and styling.
3.3. Trickle-down, trickle-across and trickle-up theories

The diffusion of innovation theory and PLC theory are not the only theoretical models
used to explain the concept of fashion. The trickle-down theory is often applied to fash-
ion and is derived from the consumer behaviour and sociology literature. The notion of
the trickle-down theory was first suggested by George Simmel (1904, cited in Sproles
[32]) who argued that once a fashion was adopted by the upper classes, the lower classes
would seek to imitate them and thus the fashion would trickle down through each suc-
ceeding lower class. This argument was famously supported by Veblen (1912, cited in
Sproles [32]) who suggested that new fashions were witnessed firstly in the wealthy
leisure class. Fashion was intrinsically important to the leisure class since it was an
opportunity for them to display their wealth [32]. These ideas support the concept of the
diffusion of innovations theory which has a basis of there being a fashion leader or
innovator who adopts the new fashion first. One of the criticisms of these early perspec-
tives on fashion is that in many of the early (pre-World War 2) periods, there is little
record or evidence that there was any such thing as fashion for the lower classes. Indeed,
history tells us that the poor were so poor that clothing would in all likelihood have been
purely functional. Indeed it is only in the post-war era that the concept of fashion accessi-
ble to the mass market increased in importance as prosperity grew and mass consumerism
became a key feature of the western world. Hence, in the same way that marketing as an
academic subject grew in popularity in the post-war era, so did research into fashion in
commercial terms.
The modern interpretation of the trickle-down theory shares the same principles in
that it works on the basis of there being a structure of layers, with the luxury/designer
end of the market forming the top layer, the one most active in creating and adopting new
and innovative fashions and ideas. These new fashions are then trickled down to the
ready-to-wear designer sector and finally interpreted at a mass market level. The argu-
ment in the contemporary theory is that only the wealthiest consumers have the taste
level, confidence and purchasing ability to try new styles and fashions. By the time these
fashions have been diluted and interpreted at the high-street level, the fashion leaders are
ready for a new fashion to be introduced so that they can continue to differentiate them-
selves [33]. This idea was further supported by the notion that the dominant haute
couture brands such as Chanel, Lanvin and Dior were so powerful and well respected
that they could dictate what the fashions of the season would be, unveiling them to the
world via their catwalk shows. Even in the era of the 1970s when we first witnessed the
democratisation of fashion, whereby fashion became widely available to the mass
market [34], for those brands and retailers at the lower price points, their supply chain
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
structures would only allow for versions of these fashions to be available to consumers at
least 12 months later. However, it can be argued that the trickle-down model lacks reso-
nance in the contemporary market where high street, mass market and value players have
been so successful in providing low-price, high fashion and react very quickly to the latest
designs, getting them into store in a matter of weeks.
The trickle-across theory is a mass-market-oriented theory which has emerged along
with the growth in consumerism and democratisation of fashion; it argues that as consum-
ers have gained access to multiple channels of information relating to fashion and style
available simultaneously to all socio-economic groups, fashion diffusion can occur at the
same time regardless of the class of the consumer [32]. The trickle-across theory argued
that fashion leaders were not necessarily distant (economically or socially) but were typi-
cally from within a consumers own social class and peer group [32]. The trickle-across
theory held much resonance in academic circles for many years as a persuasive model for
fashion leadership and diffusion and it continues to have some resonance today, particu-
larly with the advent of social media and the emergence of fashion bloggers as key opin-
ion leaders. This, alongside the changes in supply chain structures which have paved the
way for fast fashion, which is discussed later, means the latest fashion, looks and styles
are available for all to see and all to buy almost instantaneously.
The trickle-up theory is a theory of fashion leadership that has emerged most recently,
which explains the phenomena of street fashions and avant-garde consumer groups, as
opposed to designers or product developers, creating new fashions [33]. Although this
interpretation of the fashion theory is highly relevant to the modern fashion sector, the
theory was first purported in the 1970s by Blumberg [35] and Field [36] who identified
the emergence of new fashions being initiated by sub-cultures in the USA [32]. An obvi-
ous example of the trickle-up theory in action was witnessed in the UK in the 1980s with
the emergence of the punk era.
Fashion is an expression of belonging to various social and cultural groups, and fash-
ion, dress and clothing are forms of communication about our self-identity. What we
wear defines our perceived attractiveness and status [37]. Much of the sociological fash-
ion theory focuses on the concept of fashion, clothing and dress as a cultural phenome-
non; the idea is that the clothes you wear make a statement about who you are. Such a
cultural association can be seen in the rise in popularity of the so-called hip hop fashion,
very closely associated with young, black American street culture. The book by Chuck
D [38], Fight the Power: Rap, Race & Reality, charts the social, political, economic and
ethnic background to hip hop and rap and this cultural association can be linked to fash-
ions worn by early rappers and hip hop artists in the USA; for example, RUN DMC wore
unlaced Adidas trainers as a reference to the way shoelaces were routinely removed from
prisoners in American jails. The style of oversized baggy trousers showing the top of
underwear was also a reference to jail, where belts were removed for safety reasons. A
similar style was worn by this sub-culture to show solidarity with incarcerated brothers.
Similarly, wearing thick gold chains with padlocks was a fashion reference to slavery.
This fashion style was described by Wilbekin [39] as an interpretation of neo-black power
creating its own urban-street style. However, these fashions were quickly incorporated
into mass popular culture, into the world of middle-class fashion; for example, the Calvin
Klein (CK) brand used the acceptable face of rap Marky Mark in their campaigns; Ralph
Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger used popular mainstream rap and stars Sean Coombs and
Coolio for their catwalk shows [37]. This fashion street-style, generated from an under-
ground sub-culture quickly moved into mainstream fashion and its popularity meant it
was commercially attractive, so much so that Sean Coombs launched his own clothing
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
192 L. Barnes
line in 1998 called Sean John and this is now one of the biggest selling menswear brands
in the USA. This trickle-up generation of fashion style gave rise to the concept of the
cool hunter and brands such as Nike recognised the importance of street-, youth- and
sub-culture for generating mainstream fashion styles, employing the so-called cool hunt-
ers to seek out these street styles; this is now typical of the type of activity that fashion
houses and brands engage in as part of their range-planning strategy.
3.4. Fashion cycles

Linking fashion to PLC and diffusion of innovation is only one way of showing that fash-
ion is cyclical. Fashion is also determined by a more prescribed and routine obsolescence
because of its link to the seasons. The industry is almost entirely based on a bi-seasonal
approach: autumn/winter and spring/summer. Traditionally, designers and brands would
have two main collections per year. Designers, trend-prediction agencies, industry fairs
such as Pitti Filati and Premier Vision and catwalks at the various fashion weeks at London,
Paris, Milan and New York would contribute to a melting pot of design, forecasting, trend
prediction and fashion information to create the looks and fashions for a particular season
[40]. As a result of what was then a long and complex apparel supply chain, buyers worked
on sourcing product for the mass market fashion retail sector up to 12 months in advance of
the planned selling season. Clearly, the traditional buying cycle embraces a high-risk strat-
egy, relying on trend forecasts well in advance of the selling season, and forecasters would
notoriously make frequent mistakes in their predictions. Getting their predictions wrong
could result in lost sales, for example, by not ordering enough products thereby causing
under-stocking or by ordering too much of a poor-selling garment causing over-stocking
and resultant markdowns. Although the bi-seasonal approach remains the mainstay of the
fashion sector, the changing nature and evolution of the modern supply chain, as well as
the move from trickle-down to trickle-up, has resulted in a shift away from the rigid struc-
ture imposed by focusing on two seasons to the creation of smaller collections on a more
frequent basis. Guercini [41, p. 70] purports:
The new model is characterised by pronounced emphasis on tight style deadlines, order-proc-
essing mechanisms which differ from those adopted for seasonal orders and an overall drive
towards the flexibility and speed of response.
The number of planned seasons has significantly increased in response to consumer

demand for newness, resulting in as many as 20 seasons per year, as illustrated, for
example, in the case of Zara [42]. The key to accomplishing successful retailing, in
todays fashion market, incorporates both accelerated product variation and the mass dif-
fusion of designer fashions. As Alexander [43] comments, fast turnaround with respon-
sive design is crucial to high-street success.
Retailers must, therefore, have the flexibility to respond quickly to changing consumer
demands, ensuring that the desired product is in store within weeks, sometimes days,
before those demands change again and before their competitors have responded. As Birt-
wistle et al. [40] discuss, the success of the company is underpinned by their flexibility in
both design and production, allowing reaction to the latest trends and the demands of the
consumer. Failure to react quickly enough to fashion demand can result in missing signifi-
cant sales, and/or demand may have abated by the time product reaches the store resulting
in less time to make profit and a higher risk of obsolescence [42]. This contemporary
structure of fashion is what is often referred to as fast fashion.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
4. Fashion marketing
Given what is known about marketing and fashion, the question is whether fashion mar-
keting can be considered to be significantly different from our understanding of generic
marketing. One of the first textbooks to be published on fashion marketing was Mike Easeys
text in which he argues that fashion marketing is different from other areas of marketing
because of the changing nature of fashion and the role that design plays in the sector in terms
of both leading and reflecting customer needs [44]. Whilst the subject as a discrete area of
study has gathered momentum, there has been little in the way of developing this definition,
although Jackson and Shaw [45] provide a useful analysis of the general subject of marketing
in comparison with marketing as a functional business operation within the specific focus on
the fashion industry. In this debate, Jackson and Shaw [45] suggest that, operationally, the
fashion marketing function of a business focuses on the promotion and communications
aspect of the business, leaving strategic decisions, for example, relating to design or brand
concept, to other functions within the business, for example, design, buying and merchandis-
ing; there is evidence, therefore, from within the fashion business environment, in support of
the idea that fashion marketing is unique, because the specific demands of fashion require a
substantially greater focus of attention on these particular matters than would be the case for
the marketing function more generally.
4.1. Fashion and marketing

Fashion is about change and is driven by creativity. The very nature of fashion means it is
something that has short-term popularity; so a fashion product has a limited life expec-
tancy. Historically, fashion in garments has been driven by seasonality [44] whereby
consumers bought new fashion garments in tune with the seasons, typically autumn/win-
ter and spring/summer. However, over the last decade, the rise of fast fashion has seen
fashion life cycles contract to durations of sometimes only a few weeks, after which the
fashion product becomes obsolete as a new set of fashion ranges become available
[46,47]. Fast fashion has been used strategically by fashion businesses as consumers have
increasingly demanded newness and the latest fashions. Adopting a fast fashion
approach can be used to produce new fashion garments to replenish fast-selling lines, to
react to new and emerging trends by introducing new ranges quickly and to keep ranges
looking new and fresh in store [46,47]. The rise of fast fashion has created a shift from
seasonal fashion products to a constant cycle of newness in the fashion sector.
The increasing short-termism of consumer wants in relation to fashion garments is one
key feature, but the other key feature of fashion garments is the significance of creativity
and design in producing fashion garments [44]. Fashion designers take inspiration from a
huge range of sources in order to create their collections. The level of creativity and
design varies according to the brand or designer concerned, from the most extreme avant-
garde creations of Vivienne Westwood through to the reinvention of basics from The
Gap. Whatever the design creation, in business terms, the design has to be commercially
viable. The required target market has to want to buy the design, yet the design of fashion
collections is not a science. Fashion consumers are unpredictable both in terms of which
trends they will buy into and how they might be influenced to purchase. In fashion, whilst
some aspects of design can be developed in response to clearly identified consumer
demand, fashion consumers cannot always articulate what they want. In fashion terms,
they tend not to know what they want until they want it, so as a consequence, in general
marketing terms, it is not possible to use conventional marketing means to identify
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
194 L. Barnes
customer needs because the customers do not know what they need. The challenge for
marketers of fashion products is therefore about how to achieve the right balance of being
fashionable or creative enough with products to maintain consumer interest and be
regarded as innovative whilst producing collections that are commercially viable. As
Easey [44] articulates, At the centre of the debate over the role of fashion marketing
within firms resides a tension between design and marketing imperatives [44, p. 7].
4.2. Defining fashion marketing

If the definitions of marketing and fashion marketing are to embrace what is known about
marketing in the fashion industry, and incorporate the unique characteristics of fashion as
described earlier, it is possible to develop a broader view of fashion marketing and define
it thus:
Fashion marketing is concerned with understanding the complex needs and wants of consum-
ers of fashion and with orienting both strategic and operational business activities to satisfy
those demands; fashion marketings particular complexity as a business philosophy arises
from the diversity of fashion-related influences which shape consumer needs combined with
the fast-moving pace of fashion-product life-cycles.
4.3. The fashion marketing mix

Despite the limitations and debates around the marketing-mix paradigm discussed earlier,
it remains a mainstay of marketing theory and defines the scope and structure of catego-
ries of academic research and the way the subject is taught. The fashion marketing mix
has some unique characteristics.
4.3.1. Fashion product

Marketing theory defines a product as:
. . .anything that can be offered to a market to satisfy a want or need and is made up of a core
benefit i.e. what is the key benefit the customer is buying, bundled with a set of additional
values including the expected product i.e. what the customer expects to get with a product,
the augmented product i.e how the marketer exceeds expectations (the level at which compe-
tition normally takes place), and the potential product i.e. future direction of the product. [8]
The expected and augmented levels of a product are where marketing typically plays a
part, for example, through branding, sales promotion and retail offerings. This generic
theory of product marketing can be applied to fashion products, and perhaps like no other
category, the fashion marketing activity adding value to the core product is really the
aspect of the product that satisfies the consumer need. For example, the core benefit or
function of clothing is to provide protection and for modesty purposes. For fashion con-
sumers the need goes beyond that, and is also related to design, style and brand, i.e. all
the attributes that are operating at expected and augmented levels. A good example of the
applicability of this theory is to consider a pair of jeans. Levis takes the credit for invent-
ing the first pair of denim jeans back in the nineteenth century, having designed a new
highly-durable garment for cowboys in the American west. Today Levis and other denim
brands typically retail their jeans well above cost price, for example, in excess of $100. In
some cases consumers are buying these high-priced garments for particular aspects of the
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
design and style detail, but fundamentally the brand plays a huge part in determining
which jeans consumers purchase; this is closely connected to the theme of fashion dis-
cussed in the previous section, whereby fashion and what individuals wear is a key part of
how individuals communicate, portray themselves and connect with others the brand
they wear is an important part of this process.
Typically, fashion products are divided into a set of categories not usually found in
other sectors of marketing, inseparably connected to the concept of fashion having a lim-
ited life cycle. In the earlier discussion about fashion, the PLC theory, diffusion theory
and seasonal structure of fashion were presented, explaining that the life expectancy of a
particular fashion could be a matter of a few weeks, one season or through many years. In
fashion, the expected lifecycles of various fashion products are used to categorise the
products into what are termed fads, fashions or classic products. The fad products are
those with a very short life cycle. These might typically be based on more extreme or
unusual designs which appeal to only a limited group of consumers [33], for example, the
bandage dress first introduced by the designer Herve Leger. Fashion products are typically
those which run through their PLC in one distinct season whereas a classic fashion is one
which remains fashionable enduringly; a typical example is the Chanel-style, five-pocket
jacket [33].
4.3.2. Fashion promotion

In general marketing theory, the idea of promotion was derived from that of sales pro-
motion, i.e. telling consumers about the product. This notion of promotion has, more
recently, entered a new paradigm of promotion theory and is now more commonly
referred to as marketing communications, taking into account the interactive dialogue
between the company and its customers [8]. The marketing communication mix includes
advertising, sales promotion, public relations and publicity, personal selling and direct
and interactive marketing [8]. In fashion marketing communications (or fashion promo-
tion), all the tools of the marketing communications mix tend to be utilised, but some
more than others, and there are examples of techniques used in fashion marketing not
used in other sectors. For example, the use of the fashion show and catwalk collections in
generating publicity and press is a distinctive feature of fashion promotion. What is even
more complex is that especially at the designer/luxury end of the market, the catwalk
shows are used less to sell the clothes and more to sell the brand and their full range of
branded products geared towards the mass market such as cosmetics, sunglasses and per-
fumes. Another aspect of fashion promotion which is unique is the role played by the
fashion press, in identifying and capturing the new fashions as they are presented on
the catwalks. The styles they pick up and use in the highly stylised fashion shoots are the
ones typically adopted by consumers. In a sense, the fashion press, particularly titles such
as Vogue, Elle and Harpers Bazaar, are the opinion leaders when applied to the diffusion
of innovation theory. The arrival of new technologies has changed that position some-
what and what we see is a rise in importance of fashion bloggers, a change which links
to the trickle-up theory discussed earlier. Indeed, the impact of digital technology on the
fashion industry has been highly significant and represents a new paradigm for the indus-
try and for fashion promotion and is therefore discussed in more detail later.
4.3.3. Fashion place

In marketing terms, place is concerned with the distribution of products from where they
are made to where they are sold. It includes issues such as supply chain management,
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
196 L. Barnes
distribution channels, retail structure, retail location and store design. One of the key fea-
tures of fashion-place marketing has been the growth in importance of the retailer-owned
fashion brands such as Top Shop, The Gap, Zara and H&M. These own-brand fashion
retailers dominate mass market fashion and have adapted their supply chain structures to
offer high fashion in season at value prices. The value of the retailer own-brand is as pow-
erful in terms of its fashion credentials as the designer- or wholesale-brands such as Ralph
Lauren, Levis and Lacoste. What we have witnessed in the fashion sector over the last
few years is a merging and blurring of the distinction between brand and retailer. For
example, many designer brands have significantly increased their portfolio of owned or
managed stores as a way of taking strategic control of their retail experience and
environment.
4.3.4. Fashion price

Price generates revenue and is used as a way of communicating the companys intended
value positioning of its product [8]. As discussed previously, fashion consumers are often
easily persuaded to pay relatively high prices for their products because of the perceived
value they feel they benefit from them, for example, in design, fashion or brand terms.
5. Fashion marketing research

Academic research in the field of fashion marketing is rooted in the social sciences and
tends to be published in journals which are typically listed in the Association of Business
Schools journal quality guide [48]. However, fashion marketing research can also be
found in textiles journals and other specialist research disciplines including sociology,
geography, psychology, fashion theory, design and computer science.
Research in the field of general marketing, and thus also in fashion marketing, can
include developing new ideas or solutions to marketing problems, conceptualising and
theorising what is happening in businesses and other organisations and/or reporting on
trends and key themes. The nature of marketing research output is that it intends to be
applied to organisations and explain what is happening in the industry; either it provides
the academic theory to explain and improve understanding of a phenomenon or it pro-
vides a solution that can be applied in a practical setting. In this context, although this
review has argued that the emphasis in fashion marketing is different from that of general
marketing, in terms of the type of research output, there are similarities. Even so, the
research questions can have a quite different focus as a result of the unique characteristics
of fashion marketing identified earlier; hence the current fashion marketing research
agenda has its own particular focus. This article aims to summarise these key themes
which fall into two areas: research in the area of fast fashion and research in the field of
digital marketing research.
5.1. Fast fashion research

Fast fashion is a quick-response concept which has revolutionised and fundamentally
changed the fashion industry. In the early 2000s, whilst fast fashion was being widely
reported in the fashion industry press and was gathering much momentum in the industry,
it had been neglected in academic research. Given the interest in fast fashion in fashion
marketing research, the Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management ran a special edi-
tion on fast fashion research at which stage the emphasis of the research was on
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
exploring and conceptualising the issues [49]. When fast fashion was first considered in
the academic literature it was defined by Barnes and Lea-Greenwood [46] as a consumer-
driven strategy, giving rise to a new model of supply chain management featuring a con-
tinuous consumer influence on the entire pipeline. Fast fashion has subsequently
become a key feature in the UK fashion industry over the last decade. Although it was ini-
tially regarded as a niche concept offered by a few key players such as Zara and H&M,
versions of the concept have now been implemented by all the major own-label retailers
in the UK fashion market [50,51], using enhanced and more effective supply chains to be
quicker in responding to changing fashion and consumer demand.
5.1.1. The fast fashion concept

The principle underpinning fast fashion is the contraction of lead-times in getting new
garments from concept to consumer [46,52]. Fast fashion is a model whereby retailers
orientate their business strategies to reduce the time taken to get fashion products into
store, based on a system of in-season buying so that product ranges are constantly updated
throughout the season. The fast fashion approach also takes into account changing con-
sumer demand, which characterises a move away from supply chains driven by manufac-
turer/designer push to demand chains driven by consumer pull [52,53]. Therefore, the
impetus that underpins the fast fashion concept is lead-time and consumer demand:
Fast fashion is a business strategy which aims to reduce the processes involved in the buy-
ing cycle and lead-times for getting new fashion product into stores, in order to satisfy con-
sumer demand at its peak. [46, p. 259]
The introduction of consumer demand as a determinant of fast fashion indicates a

development of the theory of fast fashion, building on the in-season buying and reduced
lead-time concept by incorporating newness as a key feature of fast fashion, in other
words, by recurrent renewal and updating of ranges and merchandise distributed to the
store to satisfy the demands of and hold onto the attention of consumers [47].
5.1.2. Fashion trends and consumer demand

A combination of factors has taken place in the fashion market which has contributed to
the rise of fast fashion [47]. Fashion trends follow the principle of PLC management,
whereby products have a limited lifetime in the market place from their introduction to
the market, through maturity to decline [28]. There has been a steady contraction in the
length of fashion PLCs which has put pressure on retailers to re-stock more frequently, as
they need more ranges to keep up to date with new fashions/trends as they emerge [47];
the pressure is high because PLCs of fashion products have decreased from months to
weeks and even to days [52,54].
Consumers have become increasingly fashion savvy and are interested in fashion
and appearance for a longer part of their lives; therefore, the size of the market and
demand for fashion product has increased [55,56]. It is suggested that the phenomenal
growth in media and magazine availability and their coverage of fashion has contributed
to this growth in the fashion-aware consumer [53,54]. As consumers become more confi-
dent about fashion, the growth in demand for new fashion products increases, and in the
UK fashion, consumers now want ever-changing styles [55,57]. Mintel [58] identified the
importance of media in influencing trend-searching behaviour on the high street, whereby
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
198 L. Barnes
consumers look to magazines for ideas about the latest trends and then actively search for
these key pieces. Weekly glossy magazines in particular have been identified as key infor-
mation providers and, increasingly television shows have also developed a strong fashion
focus. Indeed fashion pervades all aspects of the media from broadsheets to tabloid news-
papers, and from popular television shows to serious documentaries, and is a particular
feature of the twenty-first century zeitgeist [47]. Catwalks have traditionally been the
drivers of fashion and Zaras fast fashion proposition has been based on the interpreta-
tion of catwalk trends [52,59]; however, celebrity-driven trends are also very important at
high-street level, as fashion consumers look to celebrities (usually through the weekly
magazines) as style advisers [60]. This interest in fashion means that consumers are shop-
ping more frequently as demand is driven by weekly magazines and daily television
shows; so they expect to see new looks and the latest pieces every time they shop [57].
Therefore, it can be concluded that fast fashion is motivated by catwalk styles, celebrity
looks and the desire for newness, particularly in the case of those items identified in the
media which create interest and drive high levels of consumer demand [47].
5.1.3. Fast fashion and supply chain concepts

The theoretical underpinning of fast fashion is derived from the literature of supply
chain management. Fast fashion is about the ability to react to trends and improve
response times [61]; therefore fast fashion is linked with the concept of supply chain
management and quick response [46,62]. By analysing these supply chain concepts, the
notion of fast fashion is characterised by interrogation of supply chain theories with the
fashion consumer at its heart [46]. Barnes and Lea-Greenwood [47] summarised the
moves to improve responsiveness of supply chains in the fashion industry that have been
made with the introduction of concepts such as the following:
Just-in-time (JIT) Bruce et al. [63] addressed JIT in a fashion context considering
it to be the delivery of finished goods just enough to meet consumer demand rather
than producing large quantities in advance and holding expensive inventory.
Agile supply chains these have been addressed by Christopher et al. [42] and
Bruce et al. [63], describing shorter, more flexible, demand-driven supply chains.
The key difference in agile supply chains, according to Christopher et al. [42], is
that they are driven by information such as market data and information sharing
between businesses in the supply chain. To fulfil consumer demand for fast fash-
ion, attention has to be paid to the ability to respond to dynamic fashion consumer
demand. Bergvall-Forsberg and Towers [64] address this and suggest that sourcing
garments closer to consumer markets, particularly in Continental Europe, creates
the required agile supply networks.
Quick response it is synonymous with processes adopted to improve the adapt-
ability of the textile and apparel supply chain, more recently applied to fashion-for-
ward garments [42,65]. Fernie and Azuma [66] focused on the notion of integration
and collaboration in quick response to improve supply chain efficiency.
Demand chains in a study outside the fashion industry, the concept of having cus-
tomer-focused supply chains was defined by de Treville et al. [67] as efficient
physical supply of the product.
Much of the early research into fast fashion focused on the concept as a supply chain
strategy [40,41,46, 6875]; however, now that fast fashion has been firmly established in
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
the fashion industry, academic research has moved on to consider fast fashion in differ-
ent ways. More recent research in the field of fast fashion has considered fast fashion
as a marketing strategy and visual merchandising strategy [47]. Such is the continuing
interest in fast fashion; the Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management ran an addi-
tional special issue on fast fashion in 2013. In their editorial, Barnes and Lea-Green-
wood [76] noted that the content of the research papers in the special edition had moved
on from simply considering the supply chain aspects of the concept to exploring con-
sumer behaviour, social responsibility and internationalisation issues in relation to fast
fashion.
5.2. Digital fashion marketing research

The UK online clothing and footwear market is expected to grow by 86% to reach a value
of 9.4 billion by 2016 [77], but it is reported that high-street fashion stores in the UK
experienced a decline in sales by 14% during 2010 whilst online sales increased by 10%
and the online sector outperformed all others in 2010 [78]. It is the phenomenal growth in
online retailing that has been blamed for the large number of retailers going out of busi-
ness, a trend which is expected to continue for the foreseeable future [79]. Any discussion
about fashion marketing research must therefore give some attention to digital marketing.
Of course e-commerce as an academic research subject has been around since the incep-
tion of the World Wide Web as a medium for making purchases. Indeed in the field of
fashion marketing, online fashion marketing has been widely researched and documented
in the literature [8087] and although the breadth of this research has incorporated aspects
such as consumer behaviour, web design, online strategy, social media and brand trust, the
emphasis of the research has always been focused on online/desktop websites. However,
the more recent phenomenal increase in the variety and number of devices through which
consumers can access the internet, as well as the rise in popularity of social media, has
resulted in a renewed interest in digital fashion marketing, with a shift towards mobile
and omni-channel applications on the research agenda. Although retailers have developed
successful online strategies, management consultant corporation Kurt Salmon [88] reports
that many have yet to grasp the value of successful multi-channel strategies.
5.2.1. Mobile commerce

Consumers are increasingly moving to accessing online data via mobile devices with
more consumers accessing the internet via a mobile rather than a fixed device, and mobile
internet acceptance is on the increase [89]. Mobile commerce allows consumers to access
online content via a hand-held device [90], potentially allowing users to perform online
transactions anytime and anywhere and is considered to be the next generation of e-
commerce [91]. The Interactive Media in Retail Group (IMRG) [78] reported that nearly
half of all the retailers were aiming to launch a transactional mobile website in 2011.
Research into mobile commerce in the field of fashion marketing is important and repre-
sents a new area for research development because, as Magrath and McCormick [89]
point out, because of differences in screen sizes, internet speed issues or even location
usage, it cannot be assumed that the mobile consumer will have the same motivations,
expectations and behaviours as the online consumer. Despite the importance of gaining
understanding about the role of marketing in mobile commerce, academic research in the
fashion marketing arena relating to mobile commerce has been sparse. One aspect of fash-
ion mobile marketing that has been explored is that of mobile content design. In the same
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
200 L. Barnes
way that website design was researched in depth because the retail environment of a web-
site is different to that of an in-store experience [80,85,92,93], the design of the commer-
cial content for a mobile device also has to be considered [89]. Retailers are looking to
develop content specifically for the mobile environment [94]. Magrath and McCormick
[89] have to date produced the only research on mobile marketing design for fashion
retailers, explaining that there are three content options for a mobile commerce retailer:
mobile website the same as the retailers online/desktop website viewed via a
mobile device;
web app the retailers online/desktop website optimised for viewing on a mobile
device;
mobile app content designed specifically for use on a mobile device taking into
account the format and functionality of the mobile device.
The mobile app (mobile application software) is the channel of most interest since the
use of apps is increasing significantly and mobile apps could soon become the most
important sales channels in fashion marketing [89]. In their research into mobile design
for fashion retailers, Magrath and McCormick [89] developed a framework organising
mobile marketing design elements into four categories:
multimedia product viewing;

informative content;
promotional material;
consumer-led interactions.
The research into mobile content design remains very much in its infancy and there
are a number of interesting avenues for the research agenda in fashion marketing terms;
for example, one of the key problems for online fashion retail has always been the diffi-
culty of how to present the true look, feel, colour and texture of a garment [80,92]. The
problems remain the same for mobile commerce; yet, the interactive nature of browsing
on mobile devices, which are usually touchscreen, offers opportunity for development of
the interface to compensate for some of these issues. However, whilst academic research
has tried to catch up with developments in mobile commerce, research may already
have superseded the concept, as retailers are now moving towards an omni-channel
concept.
5.2.2. Omni-channel fashion

As commerce moved from bricks and mortar stores to online retailing, the concept of
multi-channel was established to address the idea that retailers used a range of channels
to market including physical stores, online stores and possibly other channels such as
catalogues, direct selling and, more recently, mobile commerce to reach their target mar-
ket [80,9598]. The notion of multi-channel suggests that each channel is almost a sepa-
rate entity in its own right. However, as the number of channels has increased, each with
its own limitations and benefits, consumers are increasingly using more than one channel
when it comes to making a purchase. For example, they may use certain channels for
information searching and another channel for making the final purchase [99]. A report
from global technology company Cisco reported that consumers touch a brand an
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
average of 56 times between inspiration and transaction. These touchpoints can include
traditional retail channels including window shopping or going online to view a television
advertisement, or hearing a radio spot promoting a local sale and, increasingly, new media
touchpoints such as social networking, blogs, communities, video and location-based
services are becoming an integral part of the consumer shopping journey [100]. Research
suggests that multi-channel shoppers spend, on average, 15%30% more than shoppers
who use only one channel and estimates that omni-channel shoppers will spend 20%
more than multi-channel shoppers [101]. This has given rise to interest, both in the indus-
try and in academia, in the concept of omni-channel retailing whereby all the channels
are considered together in a more integrated way. Omni-channel retailing can be defined
as a customer experience integrated across stores, websites, direct mail and catalogues,
mobile platforms, social networks, home shopping and gaming [102]. Omni-channel
retail is an integrated shopping experience [103] that blends the advantages of physical
stores with the information-rich merits of online shopping [104]. Despite widespread
industry reporting on omni-channel as the success strategy for the future of retail, as well
as some very early academic research on the topic, many retailers are finding it difficult
to implement a successful omni-channel strategy; thus future fashion marketing research
in the area of omni-channel is likely to be highly valued by practitioners.
5.2.3. Social media in fashion marketing

Social media is now identified as part of the overall selling process and is a feature of
omni-channel retail [102] which has attracted significant interest in industry and acade-
mia over recent years both as a direct-selling tool and as a marketing communications
tool. Social media such as Facebook, Twitter and Flickr are used by billions worldwide,
and their use is not limited to the young; increasingly, Generation X consumers are also
engaging in social media [105]. Social media can be defined as a group of internet-based
applications allowing both the creation and exchange of user-generated content, for
example, blogs, collaborative projects, social networking (e.g. Facebook), virtual gam-
ing, content communities (e.g. YouTube) and virtual social worlds (e.g. Second Life)
[105]. Social media can help businesses understand more about their customers and help
customers to make more informed decisions about their purchases [106]. Businesses
regard social media as being hugely significant in terms of marketing strategy and almost
all of the major fashion brands and retailers have a presence in social media, for exam-
ple, through Twitter or Facebook. Social media has offered a democratisation of fashion
retail, in the sense that it can also be used in the same way by small independent fashion
retailers as is the case for large multinational fashion businesses, at very low cost. In
observing the industry there is a sense that fashion businesses feel they have to be on
social media and huge proportions of their marketing budget are being spent on social
media activities, but with little in the way of understanding how it can be used to achieve
core marketing benefits. This represents an opportunity for fashion marketing research.
There has been some consideration of the strategic benefits of social media in fashion
marketing, for example, Kim and Ko [86,107] analysed the impact of social media on
purchase intention and customer relationships and customer equity of luxury fashion
brands.
One of the most interesting outcomes of social media in the fashion industry has been
an evolution in the fashion leaders and influencers. In an earlier section of this paper,
it was suggested that due to the nature of fashion products having a limited lifespan,
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
202 L. Barnes
fashion is intrinsically linked with PLC and diffusion of innovation theory; indeed this
link has been established by the work of Midgley and Willis (1979, cited in Evans [24]).
PLC theory represents the sales of a product through its lifetime, as is the case for Rogers
adopter categories, by a normal distribution curve representing an initial slow growth of
sales as consumers become aware of the product, followed by rapid growth and into a
maturity phase whereby the product has achieved sustained sales which finally decline
[28]. The paper by Barnes [57] argued that PLC theory follows the pattern of a fashion
trend; thus, by linking the life cycle of a fashion trend to Rogers [26] classification of
adopters categories, it is possible to gain an understanding of the types of consumers
buying in to a trend and the stages at which they buy in. In terms of how this relates to
social media in fashion marketing, the present review argues that we are witnessing a
fashion revolution. The preliminary stage of the classifications of adopters/PLC model is
that of the creation or design stage in which a new style is invented and introduced to the
consumer. Freathy [29] notes that designers, celebrities and sub-cultural factors typically
lead this phase and may therefore be classified as the innovator adopter. As those most
interested in fashion look to the designers and celebrities, the fashion is adopted by lead-
ing consumers, often referred to as fashion leaders, fashion innovators or fashion-con-
scious consumers. They initiate progression of the fashion by being the first to adopt and
exhibit a new style within their social group, a parallel to Rogers early adopter, as dis-
cussed earlier in this paper. The literature then tells us that as increasing numbers of con-
sumers (fashion followers) buy into a trend, there is an increase in adoption, giving the
fashion social awareness and then as more consumers buy into the trend, so the fashion
moves through the PLC. So the literature identified the fashion leaders such as designers
and celebrities [57] and as Crewe [94] describes:
. . .the dissemination of designer fashion was choreographed by a handful of highly influential

fashion editors such as Suzy Menkes (International Herald Tribune) and Anna Wintour
(Vogue) who acted as global style authorities, were closely aligned to networks of fashion
designers, stylists, photographers, and journalists, and were able to control the selection, cir-
culation, and dissemination of fashion via their curation of international media publications
and the lucrative advertising revenues that accrued to global fashion magazines and their rep-
utational and authorial capital.
This elite group of influencers maintained tight control at the front end of the PLC and
shaped the trickle-down of fashion trends. However, social media has fundamentally
changed this stranglehold of control and the balance of power has shifted to consumers.
As Crewe [94] argues, social media offers a shift in power towards huge and diverse con-
sumer groups, many of whom had no status of authority or persuasion under the estab-
lished hierarchical fashion system with its high barriers to entry and exclusionary
practices. This shift in power and authority has been driven through social media in
two ways: the fashion blog and consumer-generated content (CGC).
Fashion blogging has become a hugely influential and important sector of the fashion
industry. According to Lea-Greenwood [108], Blogging has become the fashion com-
mentary of the moment. . . . Bloggers are the new influential fashion journalists of today.
A blog (a shortened form of the term web log) is essentially a website which consists of
a sequence of posts or entries placed on the site by the author, containing thoughts,
images, ideas, visuals, videos and other forms of information considered to be of interest
or relevance by the author (or blogger) [108,109]. Blogs can be interactive and blog-
gers normally attempt to develop groups of followers and encourage interactions with
their followers [108]. Indeed, fashion bloggers have become so important and influential
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
that businesses send them products to review (hopefully favourably) on their blogs; they
contribute in the wider media such as television and magazines; they style celebrities
and they secure front-row seats at the major fashion shows [94,108110]. The so-called
superblogger has become a key feature of the fashion industry, displacing the tradi-
tional power factions of the industry (such as print media, magazine editors and design-
ers) as they now wield substantial commercial influence. Such is their success that they
are able to make a very effective and lucrative living from their blogs. Garance Dore
(www.garancedore.fr/en/) [108], Suzi Lau (stylebubble.typepad.com) [94,109] and Tavi
Gevinson (www.thestylerookie.com) [94] are reported to be some of the top fashion
bloggers, making full-time careers from blogging and featuring extensively throughout
the fashion media. For example, Suzi Lau was recently featured on the front page of one
of the major fashion magazine titles in the UK, Company Magazine. Fashion bloggers
are also credited with informing street trends, in other words, developing trends in their
own right [111]. The phenomenal success of fashion bloggers has been attributed to the
speed at which they can report on the latest trend and fashion information [94,110]. Of
course, this relates very clearly to the early discussion on fast fashion and consumers
increasing desire for newness and the latest look or trend; fashion bloggers can reach
their audience with the latest fashion insight via the medium of internet far quicker than
other communications can achieve via print media [94,110], and furthermore become
part of the whole fast fashion phenomenon by driving trends to which retailers may
then react.
The second aspect of social media which represents a shift in power away from the
traditional influencers of the fashion industry is the rise of CGC. Arguably a blog could
be considered CGC, but typically CGC is considered to be content generated by consum-
ers in the form of product reviews and recommendations, for example, through Face-
book. In many ways there are parallels with blogs, for example, a consumer
recommending a product via Facebook to their friends demonstrates many similarities to
a blog. However, CGC tends to be written by consumers in a more ad hoc way than
communications via blogs. Some fashion businesses have embedded CGC into their
own websites, for example, www.very.co.uk has product reviews on their own website,
offering consumers who have made a purchase the opportunity to write a review which
can be read by other consumers prior to making their purchase. It is difficult to capture
the benefit for the brand by giving profile to this type of information over which the
brand management organisation might have little control. However, such is the increas-
ing impact that this CGC can have on consumers that there are stories of brands offering
consumers who have written poor reviews compensation in return for them agreeing to
remove their negative review.
It appears from this review of published research that the use of social media in fash-
ion can change who the influencers are in fashion and demonstrates how social media is
democratising fashion. In terms of the research agenda for fashion marketing, the new
model of fashion marketing communications is yet to be explored, for example, by
incorporating the rise in importance of fashion blogs and the contraction of the fashion
print media sector [110]. There is a dearth of literature on fashion blogs and CGC in the
fashion sector and that which currently exists is already out of date as the formats and
technologies through which consumers access blogs and CGC sites continually innovate
and change. However, such is the fundamental change in the influencers of the fashion
industry and the extent of the influence that social media can wield on fashion consumers,
that there is an imperative to include the use and impacts of fashion blogging and CGC in
the research agenda for fashion marketing.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
204 L. Barnes
6. Summary and conclusions

This review of research outputs and other publications has enabled the concept of fashion
marketing to be analysed and defined and the nature of fashion marketing academic research
to be described together in a short monograph. It provides a discussion of the marketing con-
cept from its origins through the 1980s and 1990s as new paradigms developed and their
applicability to the marketing concept were debated. The development of fashion marketing
as a discrete area for academic research is outlined, indicating its considerably greater
emphasis on marketing communication and promotion and the different forms taken by
these fashion-driven marketing communications compared to marketing in general.
There is also a summary of the literature in some of the key current research themes in
fashion marketing, namely fast fashion (in terms of both supply chain and marketing
communications) and digital fashion marketing (incorporating mobile commerce, omni-
channel and social media).
Given the current literature and research outputs relating to social media in fashion
marketing communication and promotion, the research review monograph argues that
there has been a fundamental shift in how fashion is being driven. In the same way that
value retailers have helped to democratise fashion in recent years, so too has social
media in terms of how it has handed power to lead fashion over to consumers rather
than leaving the power to lead in the hands of a few influentials.
Several gaps have been demonstrated in the research literature, in areas where there is
an urgent need for serious research investigations to be initiated, for example:
content design for fashion marketing on mobile devices;

presentation of look, feel, colour and texture with online devices.
It is clear from the research literature and current thinking on fashion marketing that
whilst there have been fruitful connections between ideas from, for example,
fashion supply chain management (quick response/demand chains) and those in

fashion marketing (fast fashion) and
apparel manufacture/fashion supply chain management (JIT manufacturing) and
fashion marketing (consumer-led fashion),
links between fashion marketing research and research in textiles science and technology
have been hard to identify. With the emergence of mobile devices, however, as tools for fash-
ion marketing communication, and given their outstanding attractiveness to consumers, there
should be new opportunities for the development of shared research interests related to:
development and implementation of omni-channel fashion marketing and retail

strategies;
the use of fashion blogs and CGC sites and their effects in the fashion retail sector;
the development of a new model for fashion marketing communications, given the
rise in importance of social media and the decline of print media in terms of fashion
influence.
For example, it would be of great benefit to both research agendas if textile scientists and
fabric technologists were to work hand in hand with digital fashion marketers in investi-
gations into how the mobile interface could be improved so as to enhance the garment
descriptions it can offer.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the intellectual debate amongst fellow fashion marketing
academics in the design and fashion business subject group in the School of Materials at the Univer-
sity of Manchester, Gaynor Lea-Greenwood of Manchester Metropolitan University, who helped to
shape the ideas for this paper, and also the work of Samantha Lynch, PhD student in the School of
Materials.
References
[1] I.M. Taplin, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 12(1) (2008).
[2] T. Hines, Globalization: global markets and global supplies chapter in Hines, T. and Bruce,
M. (2007) Fashion Marketing Contemporary Issues 2nd edition, Butterworth Heinemann,
Oxford.
[3] T. Levitt, Harv. Bus. Rev. 38 (7-8) (1960) p. 24.
[4] H.C. Barksdale and B. Darden. Marketers attitudes toward the marketing concept. The J. of
Mark 35(4) (1971) p. 29.
[5] L.W. McGee and R.L. Spiro, Bus. Horiz. 31.3 (1988) p. 40.
[6] N.H. Borden, J. Advertising Res. 4.2 (1964) p. 2.
[7] W. Walter van Waterschoot and C. van den Bulte, J. Mark. 56(4) (1992) p. 83.
[8] P. Kotler, Marketing Management, 11th ed., Pearson Education, New Jersey, 2003.
[9] C. Gronroos, Manag. Decis. 35(4) (1997) p. 322.
[10] D. Ford, Understanding Business Markets, 2nd ed., The Dryden Press, London, 1997.
[11] G. Easton, Industrial networks: A review, in Understanding Business Markets, 2nd ed.,
D. Ford, ed., The Dryden Press, London, 1992 (1997).
[12] IMP Group, An interaction approach, in Understanding Business Markets, 2nd ed., D. Ford,
ed., The Dryden Press, London, 1982 (1997).
[13] F. Buttle, Relationship Marketing: Theory and Practice, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd., Lon-
don, 1996.
[14] M.J. Baker, One more time what is marketing? in The Marketing Book, 4th ed., M.J. Baker,
ed., Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, 1999.
[15] P. Turnbull, Business-to-business marketing: organisational buying behaviour, relationships
and networks, in The Marketing Book, 4th ed., M.J. Baker, ed., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford, 1999.
[16] L.G. Mattsson, J. Mark. Manag. 13 (1997) p. 447.
[17] K. Blois, J. Mark. Manag. 13 (1997) p. 367.
[18] E. Gummesson, Manag. Decis. 35(4) (1997) p. 267.
[19] I. Gordon, Relationship Marketing, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1998.
[20] E. Gummesson, Total Relationship Marketing, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, 1999.
[21] P. Oburai and M.J. Baker, Empirical Research into Collaborative Alliances in Industrial
Markets: A Case for a Balanced Approach to Theory Building paper, European Marketing
Academy Conference, Berlin, May 1999.
[22] Chartered Institute of Marketing, CIM Glossary (website) Available at http://www.cim.co.
uk/Resources/JargonBuster.aspx, 2013.
[23] American Marketing Association, Definition of Marketing (website) Available at http://www.
marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/DefinitionofMarketing.aspx, 2013.
[24] M. Evans, Eur. J. Mark. 23(7) (1989) p. 7.
[25] E.M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, The Free Press, New York, 1962.
[26] E.M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., Simon & Schuster, London, 2003.
[27] J.P. Lundblad, Organ. Dev. J. 21(4) (2003) p. 50.
[28] M. Bruce and L. Barnes, Definitions, in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management: Mar-
keting, D. Littler, ed., Blackwell, Oxford, 2005.
[29] P. Freathy, The Retailing Book: Principles and Applications, FT Prentice Hall, 2003.
[30] D. Littler, The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management: Marketing, Blackwell Publishing,
Oxford, 2005.
[31] A. Cholachatpinyo, I. Padgett, M. Crocker and B. Fletcher, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 6(1)
(2002) p. 24.
[32] G.B. Sproles, J. Mark. 45(4) (1981) p. 116.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
206 L. Barnes
[33] S.J. Keiser and M.B. Garner, Beyond Design: the synergy of apparel product development,
3rd edition, Fairchild Books, 2012.
[34] T. Aage and F. Belussi, Ind. Innov. 15(5) (2008) p. 475.
[35] P. Blumberg, Social Problems, 21(4) (1974), p. 480.
[36] G.A. Field, Bus. Horiz. 13 (1970), p. 45.
[37] M. Barnard, Fashion as Communication, Routledge, New York, 2002.
[38] Chuck D. and Y. Jah, Fight the Power: Rap, Race, and Reality, Canongate Books, Edinburgh,
1999.
[39] E. Wilbekin, in The Vibe History of Hip Hop (1999), A. Light (ed). p. 418.
[40] G. Birtwistle, N. Siddiqui and S.S. Fiorito, J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 31(2) (2003) p. 118.
[41] S. Guercini, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 5(1) (2001) p. 69.
[42] M. Christopher, R. Lowson and H. Peck, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 32(8) (2004) p. 367.
[43] H. Alexander, Stylish in an instant. The Daily Telegraph (9 June 2003).
[44] M. Easey (ed.), Fashion Marketing, 3rd ed., Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 2009.
[45] T. Jackson and D. Shaw, Mastering Fashion Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke,
2009.
[46] L. Barnes and G. Lea-Greenwood, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006) p. 259.
[47] L. Barnes and G. Lea-Greenwood, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 38(10) (2010) p. 760.
[48] ABS, Academic Journals Quality Guide Version 4, The Association of Business Schools,
London, 2010.
[49] L. Barnes and G. Lea-Greenwood, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006).
[50] R. Baker, In-Store (2008) p. 37.
[51] Just-Style, Just-Style (2009) p. 7.
[52] D. Sull and S. Turconi, Bus. Strategy Rev. 19(2) (2008) p. 4.
[53] S.A. Doyle, C.M. Moore and L. Morgan, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006) p. 272.
[54] L. Barnes, G. Lea-Greenwood, S.G. Hayes and C. Wraeg, The impact of fast fashion on pro-
motion in the UK apparel market, Proceedings from the Textile Institute World Conference,
The Textile Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka, March (CD-ROM ), 2007.
[55] M. Bruce and L. Daly, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006) p. 329.
[56] Mintel, Womens Fashion Lifestyles UK, Mintel International Group Limited, London,
2009.
[57] L. Barnes, Fast consumers, Proceedings from the 86th Textile Institute World Conference,
The Textile Institute, Hong Kong, 1821 November (CD-ROM ), 2008.
[58] Mintel, Clothing Retailing UK, Mintel International Group Limited, London, 2007.
[59] P. Doeringer and S. Crean, Socio-Econ. Rev. 4(3) (2006) p. 353.
[60] E. Crompton, The influence of fame and celebrity in fashion: The trends to watch, Proceed-
ings from Drapers Fashion Summit High Performance Fashion, London, UK, 910 Novem-
ber 2004.
[61] S.G. Hayes and N. Jones, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006) p. 282.
[62] M. Sheridan, C. Moore and C. Nobbs, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 10(3) (2006) p. 301.
[63] M. Bruce, L. Daly and N. Towers, Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 24(2) (2004) p. 151.
[64] J. Bergvall-Forsberg and N. Towers, J. Textile Inst. 98(4) (2007) p. 377.
[65] L.C. Giunipero, S.S. Fiorito, D.H. Pearcy and L. Dandeo, Int. Rev. Retail Distrib. Consumer
Res. 11(4) (2001) p. 359.
[66] J. Fernie and N. Azuma, Eur. J. Mark. 38(7) (2004) p. 790.
[67] S. de Treville, R.D. Shapiro and A.-P. Hameri, J. Oper Manag. 21 (2004) p. 613.
[68] E. Ko and D.H. Kincade, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 25(2) (1997), p. 90.
[69] S.S. Fiorito, E.G. May and K. Straughn, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 23(5) (1995) p. 12.
[70] S.S. Fiorito, L.C. Giunipero and H. Yan, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 26(6) (1998) p. 237.
[71] A.S. Sohal, M. Perry and T. Pratt, Technovation 18(4) (1998) p. 245.
[72] M. Perry and A.S. Sohal, Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 30(7/8) (2000) p. 627.
[73] N. Azuma, J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 30(3) (2002) p. 137.
[74] H. Mattila, R. King and N. Ojala, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 6(4) (2002) p. 340.
[75] Y. Lee and D.H. Kincade, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 7(1) (2003) p. 31.
[76] L. Barnes and G. Lea-Greenwood J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 17(2) (2013).
[77] Mintel, Fashion Online UK March 2011, Mintel Group Ltd, London, 2012.
[78] IMRG, E-retail Sales Index, Interactive Media in Retail Group, London, 2011.
TTPR_A_868677.3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33
[79] Centre for Retail Research, Online Retailing: Britain and Europe 2012 (website) Available at
http://www.retailresearch.org/onlineretailing.php, 2013.
[80] N. Siddiqui, A. OMalley, J.C. McColl and G. Birtwistle, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 7(4)
(2003) p. 345.
[81] C.J. Ashworth, R.A. Schmidt, E.A. Pioch and A. Hallsworth, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 34
(6) (2006) p. 497.
[82] R.E. Goldsmith and L.R. Flynn, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 8(1) (2004) p. 84.
[83] J. Park and L. Stoel, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 33(2) (2005) p. 148.
[84] J. Rowley, Internet Res. 19(3) (2009) p. 348.
[85] H. McCormick and C. Livett, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 16(1) (2012) p. 21.
[86] A.J. Kim and E. Ko, J. Bus. Res. 65(10) (2012) p. 1480.
[87] M. Kim, J.-H. Kim and S.J. Lennon, Managing Serv. Qual. 21(1) (2011) p. 25.
[88] Kurt Salmon, UK Retailer Oasis Makes it Into the Top Five in the First Global Omni-Chan-
nel Fashion Survey (website) Available at http://www.kurtsalmon.com/UK/about-news-item/
UK-retailer-Oasis-makes-it-into-the-top-five-in-the-first-global-omni-channel-fashion-
survey?id=189&language=en-uk#.UXe8UKXZjww, 2012.
[89] V. Magrath and H. McCormick, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 17(1) (2013) p. 98.
[90] P. Mahatanankoon, Int. J. Electron. Commerce 12(1) (2007) p. 7.
[91] H. Alfahl, L. Sanzogni and L. Houghton, J. Electron.Commerce Organ. 10(2) (2012) p. 61.
[92] Y. Ha and S.J. Lennon, Psychol. Mark. 27(2) (2010) p. 141.
[93] L.C. Harris and M. Goode, J. Serv. Mark. 24(3) (2010) p. 230.
[94] L. Crewe, Environ. Plann. A 45(4) (2013) p. 760. ISSN 0308-518X.
[95] J. Rowley, J. Mark. Manag. 24(5-6) (2008) p. 517.
[96] M. Nicholson, I. Clarke and M. Blakemore, Int. Rev. Retail Distrib. Consumer Res. 12(2)
(2002) p. 131.
[97] R. Marciniak and M. Bruce, Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 32(8) (2004) p. 386.
[98] S. Cho and J. Workman, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 15(3) (2011) p. 363.
[99] S. Balasubramanian, R. Raghunathan and V. Mahajan, J. Interac. Mark. 19(2) (2005) p. 12.
[100] Cisco, The Future of Retail Touchpoints: Extending Your Reach in the Consumer Shopping
Journey (website) Available at http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac79/docs/pov/Futureof
RetailTouchpoints_FINAL.pdf, 2010.
[101] A. Bodhani, Eng. Technol . 7(5) (2012) p. 46.
[102] S. Elliott, B. Twynam, and S. Connell. Building for breakthroughs. The Korn/Ferry
Institute (2012).
[103] C. Aubrey and D. Judge, J. Brand Strategy 1(1) (2012) p. 31.
[104] D. Rigby, Harv. Bus. Rev. 89(12) (2011) p. 65.
[105] A.M. Kaplan and M. Haenlein, Bus. Horiz. 53(1) (2010) p. 59.
[106] Z. Huang and M. Benyoucef, Electron. Commerce Res. Appl. 12(4) (2012) p. 246.
[107] A.J. Kim and E. Ko, J. Glob. Fashion Mark. 1(3) (2010) p. 164.
[108] G. Lea-Greenwood, Fashion Marketing Communications, Wiley, Chichester, 2013.
[109] A. Rocamora, Fashion Theory: J. Dress, Body Cult. 15(4) (2011) p. 407.
[110] A. Rocamora, Journalism Pract. 6(1) (2012) p. 92.
[111] T.A. Rickman and R.M. Cosenza, J. Fashion Mark. Manag. 11(4) (2007) p. 604.
Copyright of Textile Progress is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

Fashion Marketing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fashion Marketing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fashion Marketing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TTPR_A_868677.

3d (TTPR) 14-02-2014 17:33

School of Materials, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

ISSN 0040-5167 print / ISSN 1754-2278 online

Textile Progress 183

2.1. The marketing concept

2.2. The marketing mix

2.3. New paradigms for research in marketing the IMP approach

Textile Progress 185

 There may be long periods of interaction before the purchase.

The focus on marketing in an organisational context continued to dominate the aca-

. . . marketing based on relationships, networks and interaction, recognising that marketing is

Relationship marketing, which dominated research in the 1990s, although derived

Textile Progress 187

customers to individual consumers, and today we see a resurgence in interest in relation-

3.1. The concept of fashion

3.2. Fashion and the diffusion of innovation

3.2.1. The innovator: venturesome

3.2.2. Early adopters: respect

3.2.3. Early majority: deliberate

3.2.4. Late majority: sceptical

3.2.5. The laggards: tradition

Textile Progress 189

3.3. Trickle-down, trickle-across and trickle-up theories

Textile Progress 191

3.4. Fashion cycles

The number of planned seasons has significantly increased in response to consumer

Textile Progress 193

4.1. Fashion and marketing

4.2. Defining fashion marketing

4.3. The fashion marketing mix

4.3.1. Fashion product

Textile Progress 195

4.3.2. Fashion promotion

4.3.3. Fashion place

4.3.4. Fashion price

5. Fashion marketing research

5.1. Fast fashion research

Textile Progress 197

5.1.1. The fast fashion concept

The introduction of consumer demand as a determinant of fast fashion indicates a

5.1.2. Fashion trends and consumer demand

5.1.3. Fast fashion and supply chain concepts

Textile Progress 199

5.2. Digital fashion marketing research

5.2.1. Mobile commerce

 multimedia product viewing;

5.2.2. Omni-channel fashion

Textile Progress 201

5.2.3. Social media in fashion marketing

. . .the dissemination of designer fashion was choreographed by a handful of highly influential

Textile Progress 203

6. Summary and conclusions

 content design for fashion marketing on mobile devices;

 fashion supply chain management (quick response/demand chains) and those in

 development and implementation of omni-channel fashion marketing and retail

Textile Progress 205

Textile Progress 207

You might also like

There may be long periods of interaction before the purchase.

multimedia product viewing;

content design for fashion marketing on mobile devices;

fashion supply chain management (quick response/demand chains) and those in

development and implementation of omni-channel fashion marketing and retail