Feb 29, 2024 | Change, Leadership, Marketing
If you asked a room full of marketers if marketing had changed in the last decade, you would get most of them telling you it had changed radically.
On the surface it has, the digital revolution has taken marketing by the neck and given it a great big shake.
There has been an explosion of sales, media, connection, and payment channels, customers are more wary, and do their own research before a marketer knows they are in the market. So called ‘content’ has almost infinite reach, but the frequency is rubbish, as there is so much digital noise, and so much competition for attention, that most of it is the digital equivalent of yesterday’s fish wrapper from the newspaper obituary section. The investment in marketing technology to manage all this has also exploded.
There is a welter of research and opinion that confirms the notion marketing has changed, some by very credible organisations.
I asked myself the question again, after stumbling across this report by Adobe, one of those credible organisations that supports the ‘yes’ vote, and came to a partly different conclusion.
Marketing has changed, absolutely, at the tactical level. The means by which marketers create and deliver a value proposition, then turn it into a transaction is unrecognisable from just 5 years ago. However, tactical implementation is just a small part of the pie.
Organisationally, marketing has changed a bit. Generally, it is still a function in a group of functional silos that reports to a CEO. A range of new titles have emerged, Chief Marketing Officer, Chief Engagement Officer, and so on, but that does not change the essential reporting and accountability of those in senior marketing roles. The marketing organisation in large enterprises has also siloed, now there is digital, customer service, technology, and a range of other functional roles within marketing not present 5 years ago.
Strategically, marketing has changed little if at all. The role of marketing is to tell the future and adjust the value proposition to customers ahead of the changing preferences and behaviour. That has always been the case, and remains so.
The only strategic change I can see is one of leadership.
In the past, marketing has generally been a passive corporate player, relegated to the role of managing one of the largest expenses in the P&L. Now the value of enterprises is so much more in the hands of intangibles, that marketing is increasingly demanding a seat at the big table. This requires that marketers are able to lead their peers and boss. Unless they can achieve this position of leadership, they will remain the simple gatekeepers to one line in the P&L, rather than being responsible for the future health of the enterprise.
Look at it from the top down.
Marketing has changed little strategically, but strategy is by far the most important component.
It has changed organisationally, and while it is important, in most areas, it is not a game changer.
Tactically, marketing is unrecognisable, but who really cares. Tactics are short term, able to be changed in real time as the situation evolves. Marketers need the organisational capability to be able to change in real time, but the impact of failing to do so is limited.
The marketing groups that will be successful into the future are the ones that are successful leaders of their organisation. To achieve this role of leadership, they must be able to identify the priority areas for investment and activity, as well as being able to remove the organisational constraints that operate in every enterprise, that are not directly accountable to marketing.
Well, they are not accountable until marketers are in the corner office, which should be happening more and more as they are the future tellers. Those who currently occupy that office are usually the engineers, lawyers, and accountants who are good at reading the past in the data, and hoping the future looks similar.
Who is next in your corner office?
Feb 15, 2024 | Branding, Marketing
There are many contenders from around the globe for the mantle of ‘GOAT”, or at least of the last 20 years.
The obvious choice might be Steve Jobs, whose single-minded pursuit of all the factors that coalesce into great, long lasting, and commercially effective marketing culture is unparalleled.
You might nominate Elon Musk. He reshaped the auto industry worldwide, made batteries sexy, and figured out how to create a reuseable rocket, before imploding by renaming Twitter ‘X’.
How about Jeff Bezos who figured we would buy books online and turned that idea into a retail behemoth that has reshaped markets.
Some might add the foul mothed Gary Vaynerchuck to the list, whose ability to promote himself while talking about himself is unmatched.
Then there is a small number of genuinely original marketing thinkers and academics: Seth Godin, Mark Ritson, Byron Sharp, Roger Martin, and Scott Galloway.
Add in a few hands-on practitioners like Angela Ahrendts, Richard Branson, Marc Pritchard, and a trio of Aussies who changed the world, Melanie Perkins, and the Atlassian duo of Farquhar and Cannon-Brookes (whose core values include ‘don’t F%@k the customer’) and you have a good list.
However, my nomination would be from outside the usual ‘who is the GOAT’ box. It is a 34-year-old musician, songwriter, entrepreneur, and publicity machine, who has added tens of billions to the GNP of the US.
Taylor Swift.
I could not identify one Taylor Swift song, and I do not know if she even has any musical talent, but she certainly is a truly great marketer!!
To have the world talking about you, (even a 72-year-old bloke in a blog post) to have massive fan clubs of ‘Swifties’ salivating over every new piece of iconography, hordes fighting to pay eyewatering amounts to get nosebleed seats in a 100,000 seat stadium, takes some talent.
What makes her so great? Indeed, what are the common characteristics of all those in the list?
- Understands who her customers are, and applies relentless focus. Swifts core market is young women and girls. She has demonstrated mastery in engaging with that audience with the music, visual extravaganza, and personal storytelling that resonates. She is also a powerful role model, encouraging independence, ambition, creativity and determination, emotions to which those in her market all aspire.
- Consistently creates value for customers, individually. It seems the ‘Swifties’ out there all see Taylor as someone they easily relate to personally, across a wide range of channels and media. She is consistently delivering experiences, based on the music and extravaganza shows, but supported by all sorts of adjacent activities, such as having Kobe Bryant, a superstar in his field, come on stage at a concert and wax lyrical about her kindness, generosity, and ‘grounded’ personal values. She tells Swifties what they want to hear, and even their parents have trouble arguing!
- Is ‘the only one’. Marketing success is an outcome of meticulous attention to detail, and the communication of all those details in a package. It requires two types of activity that is an extremely difficult mix to get right. On one hand, you need to ensure ‘activation’. The calls to action that today generate the motivation to spend money to be a part of the party. On the other, it requires that long term investment be made that build a brand, an identity that engages and creates a long-term platform from which the activation and short-term revenue generators are launched. When done well, as in this case, there will be ‘only one’. Where else can a teenage girl find the excitement, engagement, communal vibe she gets from being part of a ‘Swiftie’ fan community?
- Swift applies compounding leverage. Taylor has executed a masterful commercial strategy. Unlike almost all other entertainers, she has retained control of everything, and runs the whole shebang as the CEO of a large, volatile and very complex business entity. Her uncanny ability to generate ‘Buzz’ around everything she does, which is spread by wildfire word of mouth and unpaid media enables a continuous stream of ‘Swift-news’ which has fans hanging out for more. She provides the creativity, leadership, and alignment most CEO’s can only dream of across the diverse range of activity her business embraces.
Swift is touring Australia, starting later this month, with multiple sold out shows in Sydney and Melbourne. The hype is becoming all consuming: you even have to reserve a spot in the line to pick up your merch and get to the cash register at the exit of the ‘pop-up’ merchandise stores.
Header illustration is via DALL-E, everything else is ‘organic’
Feb 12, 2024 | Branding, Communication, Customers
Last week I provided a template for a Customer Value Proposition. The template works well, but ‘Customer Value Proposition’ is a piece of marketing jargon which just means making a promise to your customers.
This presupposes that you actually know who your ideal customers are, and what sort of promise would be attractive to them.
In the January February 2024 Harvard Business Review there is an article called ‘The right way to build your brand‘ written by Roger Martin and two Co-authors. The article sets out research that proves the hypothesis that making a specific promise to customers is more attractive than a generic claim of some level of excellence. The specific promise is about the benefit a customer will receive with use of the product. A generic claim to greatness is just about the product.
It does not surprise that the first is more powerful than the second.
‘Your promise is your strategy’ is a sub headline towards the end of the article. When you think about it, the observation must be right. Strategy is a process of influencing factors over which you have no control in such a way that the subsequent behaviour of the customers benefits your enterprise rather than an alternative. Making a promise of performance in delivering an outcome desired by a customer is about the strongest driver of short-term behaviour I can think of.
Delivering on the promise, will build trust.
Right at the end the authors ask four crucial but simple questions that can be used to determine if a proposed advertising campaign is worth investing in:
- Is the campaign based on a clear unambiguous customer promise?
- Were customer insights used to identify a promise the customers value?
- Is the promise framed in a way that is truly memorable?
- Were product marketing, sales, operations, and customer service involved to ensure the promise will be consistently fulfilled?
To me, this sounds like a comprehensive framework by which to decide if a proposed communication campaign is a worthwhile investment.
Jan 15, 2024 | Collaboration, Leadership
‘Do not ever patronise me again.’
Those words are seared onto my brain, coming from the mouth of a new boss many years ago.
I had not long been employed and wanted to make an impression. Therefore, every conversation was a combative one, a conversation I set out to win, seeing that as a way to impress.
As the conversation which took place in my office ended, the new boss for whom I had quickly built a strong regard, stood up and walked out. He turned around just outside the door, and walked back a couple of paces, and uttered those words.
‘Do not ever patronise me again’.
He then turned on his heel, and walked out.
I was both astonished, and very concerned. It was only after a painful re-run and examination of the conversation that I realised he was right.
I had, completely unwittingly, patronised him.
What had driven that destructive behaviour?
It took a while for me to understand my own behavioural characteristics. In those days I went into every similar conversation with a point of view that I was prepared to defend aggressively. While I was always prepared to adjust my position in the face of good arguments, this was deeply hidden. In addition, I failed the most significant test of a good debater.
I failed to listen.
My ‘tin-ear’ did not hear a word that was said in any context other than: ‘with me or against me’.
No such thing as active listening, understanding the basis of a differing view, or reflecting on the quality of the foundations of my own.
Later that day I did go into the boss’s office and apologise, acknowledging my mistake, and thanking him for bringing it so painfully to my attention.
We worked together very productively for a decade after that incident in two different companies. We had many debates, and rarely was the outcome black and white, right, and wrong. It proved absolutely that two heads are always better than one, assuming the heads are aligned to the same objective.
Header acknowledgement. My thanks to Dilbert and Scott Adams.
Dec 20, 2023 | Analytics, Marketing
This is an indulgence, but who cares, it is that time of the year.
I do not spend too much time worrying about numbers, this blog is my personal ‘journal’ of the stuff I am thinking about. If others get some benefit from that great, if not, nobody cares.
However, contrary to the above, there are some lessons for me in the numbers, and learning from the past, and improving is what it is all about.
The obvious skew in numbers that arises from posts early in the year having more time to gather readers than those posted later, has been ignored. Most posts see the vast majority of views in the first week or so, so timing should not be a huge influencer. However, there are a few exceptions to that rule.
Number 8 on the list is a post on the business model of supermarkets written in 2014. This has been in the top 10, usually the top 3 every year since. Number 7 is a thought starter on the budgeting process, that annually added job everyone except accountants hate, which was posted in January 2020. Every other post on the list is from 2023.
There are a few common characteristics of the top posts.
- Most promise a silver bullet of some sort in the headline. This may attract readers, but sadly, does not make the meat of the post any better. I can only hope that having been attracted, some might take some value out of the post.
- They are generally shorter than the average. This may reflect the focus and promise of the headline, or alternatively, I just did a better editing job.
- This characteristic is both a surprise and a worry to me. Apart from the two posts from previous years, and number 10 on the list, all have as a header a ‘Dilbert’ cartoon. Perhaps the presence of Dilbert is a strong motivator to readership? There was no intent here, and that correlation (or is it causation?) came as a complete surprise to me.
- Almost half the readers come from the subscription list, which is not big, about 35% from LinkedIn, and the balance from search engines, mostly from Google, but a surprising number from random engines. Readers come 70% from Australia, next biggest is the US, followed by (presumably) taxi drivers in Mumbai looking to emigrate, and a few from places I have to consult an Atlas (remember those) to find.
- Linkedin attracts a varying number on the platform, from a few to in some cases many thousands. The ‘views’ which misleadingly just counts the number of feeds a post has been shown in, bearing no relationship to being read, varies between a few, and many thousands. I only take account of the number of comments and reposts as an indicator of value, with a lesser value on ‘likes’. Linkedin discourages links leading off the platform by sticking offenders in ‘Linkedin gaol’, meaning they squeeze the algorithm so fewer people on the platform have the chance to see it. Suffice to say, I expect my gaol sentence to be ‘life’.
- As I run my eye down the full list, there is an increasing number of posts from previous years, some delivering very regular cadence of readership, years after publication. This is gratifying, and indicates that unlike a newspaper, a useful blog post is not just tomorrow’s fish wrapper. One that does continue to amuse is ‘Public Sector Flatulence’ published in 2013. It can go months without any readers, then suddenly, and suspiciously coincidental to some politicians brain-fart, it generates a bunch of views, and the odd comment.
For those interested, the list from top to number 10 is:
The simple choice marketers must make.
Plans never reflect what happens, so why bother?
The single key to great success.
Enduring culture change demands action.
The easiest and most effective way to build carbon emission compliance.
How to maximise the return from your investment in sales personnel.
5 Key factors to consider when planning your budgeting process.
3 essential pieces of the supermarket business model.
Equity or loans: The entrepreneurs funding dilemma.
The two key building blocks of strategy.
Thanks to all my readers, have a safe and merry Christmas, or whatever it is you celebrate (a valued friend is a Hindu, and Hindu’s traditionally marry on the last Sunday of the month. Guess what he and his wife of 30 years are celebrating)
Note: Given the number of links in the post, Linkedin will send me to their gaol for life, ensuring as few as possible casual lookers get to see the posts. So, please encourage those who might be interested to subscribe on the StrategyAudit site. That way they can continue to have the chance of seeing the outcomes of my addled musings.
Header courtesy of Dilbert, and Scott Adams, again. It just seemed right.
