The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that, under conditions of postmodernity, the market is too complex to be responded to with an IMC‐framework. While the desire of IMC scholars and practitioners to reinstate order and predictability in an increasingly disordered and fragmented world is understandable, such a mission may be misguided. The paper seeks to discuss the possibility that such attempts instead precipitate the production of complexity of an even more unpredictable nature.
The paper proceeds through a critical juxtaposition of postmodernity and IMC, arguing that the latter – with its ambition to impose order and control – fails to understand important dimensions of contemporary markets.
Rather than imposing a monological and hegemonic identity on markets and organizations – an identity that will unavoidably be challenged by consumers and employees – contemporary marketers and managers need to realize that organizational change and adaptability presuppose openness to variety, difference and polyphony.
Although organizations, just like individuals, need a coherent narrative, polyphony promotes shared understandings and involvement and permits a kind of collective ownership that cannot be attained through the simple application of one‐way managerial models that claim consistency and coherence without founding it in the life‐world of the receiver.
Postmodern communication cannot adhere tightly to principles of IMC. Instead, openness towards fluidity and a certain degree of indeterminacy must be nurtured if organizations wish to cope with the postmodern world. Along with tolerance toward variety, organizations need to develop a tolerance for meanings negotiated together with consumer communities, such as brand communities, in the market.
