Can We Save Marketing?

indecision dice

Image by snigl3t via Flickr

Over the last six years, I have had a personal interest on the verge of a crusade to better understand and study lead marketers and CMOs across industries. My concern, after meeting well over 300 leaders, is marketing is lacking influence and at some companies is considered “damaged goods”.

How do we fix it? The question I hope to answer over the coming months. There are three areas of concern, which I believe highlight the main issues.

1. Communications heavy, impact light

Historically, marketers and our peers in the executive ranks have been hyper-focused on communications – the latest ad, hot new website or now how many people “like” us on Facebook. We have lost substance and, in some cases, lack the will and determination to educate our organizations on what marketing is and is not. Traditional marketers seem to be less likely to hold the CMO post. In many of the companies I have spoken with, it is more likely that someone from sales, product or operations to be in the CMO role. The stinging reality… they are doing a better job. Why? Probably because they have a broader perspective on what is driving the business and how to harness it.

2. Losing influence, merging functions

Marketing leaders have lost influence. A recent IBM study of 1700 CMOs, show that less than half of the CMOs surveyed have much sway over key parts of the pricing process, and less than half have much impact on new product development or channel selection. Being a Marketing leader is such a herculean task of political gamesmanship to drive a cohesive strategy there is now wonder that the average tenure is still less than ½ that of the CEO. Despite these odds there is still hope as it seems a trend is growing in combining posts like Chief Commercial Officer or Chief Sales & Marketing Offer or Chief Marketing and E-commerce Officer. Although a great recognition on part of CEO and board that greater ownership is needed, they still lack the strategic focus on marketing in its potential long-term impact.

3. All-stars abandoning ship, lack of pride

My gravest concern is our very best are abandoning ship. The “best of the best” marketers that I have spoken to, rarely self-identify themselves as a marketer but rather opt for a “business leader”, “business executive”, “driver of the business”, etc. When I have asked do you consider yourself a marketer, their voice gets quiet and they say “no.” Despite the fear of being pegged a marketer, almost all agree that marketing is at the core of how they approach their jobs and that marketing with a big “M” is what more organizations desperately need.

Depressed yet. There is hope.

We have to start thinking about what matters again. We need to learn from those we think of as magicians of the practice. At the heart of what marketers are trying to accomplish is meaningful differentiation and capturing uncontested demand. “Meaningful differentiation” is difference that matters and customers are willing to pay for. As for “uncontested demand”, this term comes from Blue Ocean strategy and is the whitespace source of new demand we all seek that allows our products and services to occupy a new space that satisfies a real need not previously addressed.

Let’s all get back to what matters, which should deliver the impact, influence and pride marketers are lacking today. Help save marketing!

Enhanced by Zemanta

IBM takes on SAS for analytics domination, but neither is superior

IBM Global Services
Image via Wikipedia

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that IBM plans to acquire SPSS for $1.2B all cash deal, which is roughly a 42% premium.

Watch out, SAS!

This match-up will be fun to watch… the massive public company, IBM, takes on the large private company, SAS — Abbreviation vs. Abbreviation. For those interested in the analytics that each is pushing the “abbreviation” comment has more to it than meets the eye. Each company is trying to help users make sense of their vast amounts of data through the use of statistics or business intelligence tools. Now, why is the “abbreviation” concept funny? Well by synthesizing data each company’s typical analytic process tries to make sense of the data by creating “buckets”, like an average or a customer segment. The consequence of “bucket-izing” or summarizing is data is lost for the greater good of manageability — International Business Machines becomes I.B.M and many much younger than I have no idea what IBM use to stand for.

O.k. so why are you still reading after such a failed joke? The main reason is that this is a big bet by IBM and SAS is already seeing the payoff as the market for these tools increases faster than the market for other technology solutions. Thee two companies largely now “own” this market and IBM with the acquisition hopes to offset a dying/shrinking annuity stream with a new growing one. The real fight for superiority in analytics is occurring in the new advances in econometrics and applications of mathematical models and hardware advances that make “abbreviation” or elimination of data a thing of the past. More simply, the power to treat a given customer the way they need to be treated and not like the generic segment they have been defined in.

More to come in follow-on posts as to the advances in analytics and implications, but until then check out Sentrana, a partner of CMG Partners and company with a superior science and technology. Read a Sentrana blog post debating the merits of IBM’s string computing claims.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Rise of Experience: the next horizon to captivate customers

Spice Market (Mısır Çarşısı) Istanbul
Image by exfordy via Flickr

This is the fifth in a series of short posts related to The CMO Agenda research. Informed by recent CMO conversations and CMG Partners‘ collective experience helping top marketers develop marketing strategy, we have compiled a list of seven ideas or jump starters for further conversation. These are meant to spark discussion, ideas, and action as we all enter a difficult 2009.

Many industries and sectors have seen new growth opportunities shift from products to services. For example, take the classic case of IBM and the switch from product to services, which is cited many times over as what saved the company.

“Experience” might be next frontier as customer service is now becoming a qualifier for purchase decisions versus an order winner. Differentiating on an experience could range from engaging all the senses in industries like travel and leisure to providing simple surprise and delight moments in less experiential industries like technology or manufacturing. The Experience Economy by B. Joseph Pine and James H. Gilmore is a source for much more to think about along these lines.

Recently, I worked with a luxury travel company on defining a new set of products for the high net worth baby boomer market. Through focus groups we learned that boomers were craving experiences. The example that sticks out most was a person stating: “I want to be guided by a well know chef through the Moroccan spice market, hand select ingredients for dinner, then participate in the cooking process — culminating in the meal itself.” Oh.. and research shows that they are willing to pay through the nose to get this!

For a more grounded example…
Not too long ago, I opened a college savings/investment account for my newborn daughter.  I picked Scottrade because I had previously opened a brokerage account and was satisfied.  Within 4 hours of applying for an account online, the local branch office, one mile away, called to make sure everything went as planned and to see that any questions I may have had were answered.  It was a simple yet effective point of differentiation, and I loved it.

Whether meandering through a spice market or simply calling your customers to make sure they had a good experience, marketers need to think beyond the widget or service offering of today. How will your company or industry take advantage of this opportunity to win or retain customers with a unique experience?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Service brands: vision of the future?

As a marketer and consultant, I always find it difficult to explain what a brand is to people that are not familiar with the concept (e.g. my mom). This task of explaining things becomes increasingly difficult when the brand is not something you can touch or feel like a service.

Service Brands are populating the landscape today and I feel a strong desire to learn from them as many other marketers should. Why? Because the idea of customer engagement, loyalty, or the idea of employees living the brand are old news to the service brands that get it right. Sure, the work is never done, but they are light years ahead of the consumer packaged goods companies.

I have put together the below diagram as an example of how the landscape of product-to-service brands is complex:

Examples Service Brand Landscape

The Bottom Line:

Three brands to take a page from are: Scottrade, Netflix, and Red Hat.

  • Scottrade has mastered customer service in my opinion. I must admit that I have a couple of accounts with them and within hours of making a major transaction on-line the local office (1 mile away) calls to make sure everything went as I expected.
  • Netflix mastered a simple concept of adapting to consumers lives and taking away the hassle of the rental store and late fees. Simplicity is their virtue. The next chapter of on-line and downloads for movies will likely test them.
  • Red Hat sells “free software”. In the early days, they boxed free software and made it easy to buy. Now they are leading and prospering in the enterprise business software arena and wining more than their fair share. The company’s culture of transparency and openness that is shared with the open-source community which fuels the software is Red Hat’s greatest asset. How else could you actually sell free stuff?

Links of interest:

Chris Grams Blog – Senior Director of Brand Communications & Design, Red Hat

The Official Netflix Blog

Scottrade YouTube Channel

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Loyalty programs under attack

A colleague sent me a Wall Street Journal article, Loyalty Program May Not Reward AmEx and then I came across this travel study released by IBM. The WSJ.com article highlights that as consumers budgets tighten redemption could become as issue for the likes of American Express with large rewards programs and subsequently this could hit their earnings in coming quarters. The Travel study then highlights that Airlines need to overhaul their rewards programs. This quote sums it up:

“Travel providers must keep their finger on the pulse of consumers and be able to respond to their changing needs and demands, while balancing the associated business economics…” “Loyalty cannot be bought — it has to be earned. That will only be done if travel providers can serve up a consistent, differentiated experience that is more valuable and relevant for individual customers.” -Bruce Speechley, Partner, Hospitality and Leisure Practice Leader, IBM Global Business Services

I personally feel that these points-based loyalty programs are too rampant and in many cases outdated. They start with one company in an industry trying to differentiate themselves and then morph into “me too” programs from the competition.

At CMG Partners, I worked on a program concept for a media company that was points-based, but focused on giving once-in-a-lifetime experiences. These experiences would be made possible due to the incredible assets the company had. The goal of this program was to create increased customer engagement to the company’s products/services. Now you are probably asking, what makes this any different? The focus on very high-end exclusive rewards and the fact that this could differentiate them for a very long time because the company “owned” these assets.

A few tips or learning’s on loyalty programs:

  • Set a clear goal for your loyalty program and how you will measure it
  • Design in sustainable differentiation because the “me too” crowd is waiting to pounce on your idea
  • Make these programs core to your business not just another marketing program which could be short-lived