Marketers and companies have identified many theoretical journeys and frameworks to help make sense of an otherwise seemingly chaotic world of ushering in transactions from a Patron group. Their goal is to systematize the path consumers take when finding, evaluating, purchasing from, then relating to brands and their products. The thinking is that with a clear understanding of a pathway of behaviors, the easier it is to replicate the magic of increased sales and correlating benchmarks of success.

To date, there have been three journey-related frameworks that I think are worth reviewing in more detail.

The Classic Funnel Theory

One of the first known consumer journey theories, or Patron journey as I call it, was established in 1989 as “The Purchase Funnel” by  Elias Elmo Lewis, this theory became the go-to thinking amongst marketing professionals and has persisted ever since. That’s a heck of a lot of time to not only persist, but remain consistently cited and leveraged. One must question whether or not The Purchase Funnel, and its related theories, is still viable  considering how different the world and people are today compared to then.

The Marketing Funnel theory offers a structured approach to understanding consumer behavior. It visualizes the consumer journey as a linear process, moving from one stage to another. The stages are often broken down into four: Awareness, Interest, Desire, Action (https://www.hotjar.com/marketing-funnel/). 

The first stage, Awareness, is where all Patrons start, according to the theory. From there, through a series of marketing activities, Patrons are engaged by brands to develop awareness around their offering and why it should matter to them (e.g. how does it fit into their day, life, and lifestyle.) Patrons in this early stage are often unaware of the brand or what it puts into the world.

Through consistent and effective marketing practices, Patrons funnel down into the next stage: Interest. 

This model is valuable for simplifying complex concepts and creating clear, actionable strategies. It can be particularly useful in traditional advertising contexts, where a linear progression often still applies.

Our world has drastically changed since 1889, which may seem an obvious statement not worth making. However, so many marketers and agencies rest their laurels on a 100 year plus theory as if the world is the same. Therefore, I’ll write again: The world is completely different from 100 plus years ago and so are the people in it, and how they behave.

Google’s Mess Middle Theory

Google’s “The Messy Middle” theory, on the other hand, recognizes the changing dynamics of the digital age. It acknowledges that the consumer journey is no longer a neat, linear process but a tangled web of interactions and choices. It’s akin to experimenting with different ingredients, flavors, and textures in a dish, allowing for more creativity and adaptability. This theory encourages marketers to embrace the complexity of the modern consumer experience, where individuals move fluidly between stages, influenced by various factors.

Brand Intimacy Theory

Brand Intimacy, a relatively newer concept, introduces a more emotional and relational dimension to the mix. It emphasizes the importance of building deep, meaningful connections between brands and consumers. This journey involves bonding, fusing, and, ultimately, achieving intimacy with consumers. It’s like the art of creating a gourmet meal that not only satisfies hunger but also nourishes the soul. Brand Intimacy focuses on fostering loyalty, trust, and a sense of belonging—qualities that go beyond the traditional Marketing Funnel.

So, where does Brand Intimacy fit in? It’s like adding a secret ingredient to a recipe—the one that elevates the dish from ordinary to extraordinary. Brand Intimacy complements both the Marketing Funnel and “The Messy Middle” by emphasizing the emotional and personal aspects of the consumer journey. It’s a reminder that behind every transaction, there’s a human being with emotions, desires, and a need for connection.

Pulling back a bit, one starts to realize that the very concept of a “correct” theory could be a fool’s errand. It’s like searching for the perfect recipe—it all depends on the desired flavor and the ingredients you have at your disposal, and the moment in time for the recipient of the recipe. If someone isn’t in the mood for Italian cuisine, then even the “best recipe” will always fall short.

So why bother thinking about, and establishing a theory or framework at all?

Despite the pitfalls, theoretical frameworks give marketing leaders the ability to develop a strategy upon which tactics can be applied and activated. Without one, the ability to plan goes down the drain, and the ability to forecast is null and void. 

Additionally, there could exist a theoretical journey that’s reliable enough to meet the needs for planning, activating, measuring and iteration. One that doesn’t micromanage a fluid process, and that’s exactly what I intend to lay out here and throughout the book. But first, we must give credit where credit is due.

Both the Marketing Funnel theory and Google’s “The Messy Middle” theory have their merits, and neither can be deemed universally “correct” or “incorrect.” As for the Brand Intimacy journey, it’s a unique perspective that adds yet another layer to our understanding of consumer relationships with brands after the initial purchase moment.