The Marketing Bureau

Brian H Meredith writes : This afternoon I have been trawling through some of my resource files and I came across a Speech that I made in 1998 at the ANZMAC Conference (Australia & New Zealand Marketing Academy) held, that year, at the University of Otago. I asked myself whether, if I were delivering it next week, I would change anything I said?

And my answer? No, not a word. But that’s my view – what’s yours?

 

Transcript

 

The title of my Presentation to you this afternoon raises a question that may well sound like a dumb one to this esteemed audience.

If it does, I apologise but ask you to tolerate me for a wee while whilst I attempt to put it into some context and, hopefully, demonstrate to you, neh, even convince you, that the question “What is Marketing” is, in fact, one of the most compelling questions to face both Marketing Academia and Professor Mueller-Heumann’s “real world” for some considerable time. 

Indeed, I believe that it is a question that goes to the very core of business philosophy and operation and that the considerable confusion and debate that frequently surrounds the question (at least when I ask it of people) is a very significant contributing factor to the relatively low levels of true market orientation in New Zealand businesses.

Here’s a fact. During the course of my consulting and training work, I frequently ask the question of all sorts of people in all roles in all types of organisations in both the public and private sectors. And the answers that I typically receive are ore than a little worrying.

If I ask 20 people in a Workshop that question, I know I’m going to get 20 different answers or, at the very least, significant variations on a theme. (And, by the way, that still applies when the people in the Group are “Marketing” People!)

Is it:

 “Arresting The Human Intelligence Long Enough To Extract Money From It?” 

I quite like that one but, no, it had better be a heck of a lot more than that if we are to build and sustain profitable businesses in the new millennium. But I have to tell you that, in my experience, it’s not much more than that in many businesses.

Is Marketing a noun? a verb? an adjective?

If I take a look around the New Zealand business landscape I find examples, by the truckload, of it being all of those things (often all at once).

Marketing is frequently described by others in organisational life as being “that place where the ads are done”. It is often seen as being that place where the people are just a tiny bit younger than the rest of the organisation. Where they wear clothes that are just a tiny bit more colourful than the rest of the organisation. Its that place where the people are far more likely to drive a red European car than a brown Japanese car. 

And still in the perceptions of others in the organisation, Marketing people seem to have a more than is healthy knowledge of the 101 different ways in which to order a coffee in Courtenay Place, Parnell or the environs of the Octagon. And, well, they do seem to spend quite a lot more time than the rest of the organisation practising those 101 ways of ordering coffee in those places.

Marketing is frequently a place where things are done – “oh, get Marketing to do that” or “That’s Marketing’s job, give it to them”.

And the things that they do do? 

Well, its important and costly stuff like briefing advertising agencies, briefing designers, briefing DM houses, briefing consultants (although they don’t do nearly enough of that stuff for my liking!) and, generally, running around the place with cell phones and Personal Organisers spending the money that has been so hard won by the rest of the organisation.

Yes, Marketing is where money is spent – everywhere else in the organisation is where it is earned – an intriguing reversal of Drucker’s contention that it is the other way round.

And Marketing people suffer so badly from being misunderstood – “My CEO just doesn’t understand me” is the common and plaintiff cry of the frustrated marketing person who has just been told that there may be no more spending on this activity or that project.

And what about these marketing people – who are they and where do they come from? 

Well, increasingly, I am delighted to say, they are emerging from fine institutions like this one. But that is a relatively recent phenomena and will take time for any positive impact to be felt.

In the meantime, we will continue to have marketing departments populated with more than a few over promoted Secretaries who, having done a good job (and in lieu of a pay rise) were given the title of PA. 

In that role they excelled once again and, most impressively of all, organised a couple of first class Client Christmas Parties. And oh, those Invitations were so beautifully designed and produced by that little chap she found in town. 

Yes, this lady needs a wider stage on which to perform, a broader landscape on which to excel – let’s promote her to Marketing Executive. 

And, hey presto, we’ve got another marketing professional in the ranks!

Now, add to this little landscape the myth that most CEOs understand Marketing. Have studied it. Practised it. Have become adept at it and what a right royal little pickle we have got ourselves into.

In their book “Marketing Myths That Are Killing Business”, Clancy & Shulman identified this as “Myth No 4” of 173 (quite a high ranking really!). 

And they based this on their Research amongst 1200 U.S. CEOs who completed their Marketing I.Q. Test.

The results were, frankly, astounding. Without going into the detail of the instrument design or the scoring methodology, the outcome was that the average Marketing IQ of these CEOs is 79.

This is a sobering figure when you realise that someone who answered “don’t know” to every one of the 50 questions would have obtained an 80! 

Marketing IQ scores did tend to rise with company size – people with greater Marketing smarts are running bigger companies. Yet not one of the CEOs in the study had a Marketing IQ above 120.

And how come this sorry state of affairs has come to pass? 

Substantially, in my view, because organisations and their CEOs have, for a very long time, believed finance to be the centre of the universe. And, as a result, finance typically dominates everything that an organisation thinks, says and does. And it is responsible for the fact that the majority of CEOs in New Zealand businesses do not come from Sales or Marketing backgrounds but, rather, from finance backgrounds.

For these CEOs, it is a common belief that marketing is a department where stuff is done and, worse, where money is spent. And what’s even worse, is that the quality of marketing personnel in those departments has not been of a sufficiently high level to allow them to educate those finance centric CEOs to come to understand Marketing and the Drucker reality that this is the only place where revenue is actually produced – everything else incurs cost.

In my view the reason why New Zealand businesses are so bad at Marketing (because, in my opinion,  they are) is perfectly simple - it seems clear to me that if you’re gonna have trouble defining it then its gonna be an uphill struggle to actually do it.

Marketing has existed, and largely continues to exist, in a functional or departmental “box”. The Head Office structure typically includes Finance, Human Resources, Administration, Sales, R&D, Marketing and a range of other “boxes” full of “stuff”. (oh, and if anyone can explain to me why the Sales and the Marketing “Boxes” are distinctly separate, I’ll happily shout them a damn fine dinner!)

Each “box” has a Manager of some shape, size or description, many of whom are engaged in the, almost full time, occupation of protecting their “box” from marauding savages who would, given half the chance, take the “box” and use it to make their “box” bigger and stronger.

When they’re not doing that, they’re likely to be devising strategies to ensure that their “box” looks good to the Big Chief Corporate Wallah so that, when it comes to dividing up the spoils of the commercial battle, then his “box” is gonna get a bigger “cut”.

And whilst all this (and a great deal more) is going on, the other people who inhabit the “box” are being given their instructions and, if we’re lucky, having their performance measured and appropriately recognised.

And in the Marketing Department they’re likely to be plotting sophisticated strategies to achieve fairly unsophisticated and frequently unquantified or unquantifiable objectives and running around planning this campaign, executing that promotion, implementing that PR initiative and all that other terribly important marketing “stuff”. 

And all of this is being done to try to achieve a set of financial objectives into which they have had zero input and have been prepared by the Big Chief Finance Wallah based on expenditure being last year less a bit and Income based on last year plus a bit – nett result supposedly being “growth”.

And if the organisation is really sophisticated in its thinking, the people in the Marketing “box” may even be working with the Sales Department (another “box” with another warrior watching over the drawbridge). But in fact, in this particular business landscape, the odds are against this.

And, if you think this is nothing more than the cynical ramblings of someone who wouldn’t know his corporate culture from a stab in the back, let me assure you - this is the way that it is in more organisations than we might like to admit! And the practitioners in the audience know this and many of them are right now shifting uncomfortably in their seats!

Bringing this stuff down to the currency of daily existence I have a brief but oh so typical example of what this landscape looks like. 

A colleague of mine recently tried to place an advertisement in a major daily newspaper (no names for fear of upsetting someone’s granny). 

Such were the scale of the difficulties that he encountered (for one reason or another) that he telephoned the Advertising Manager to both seek help as well as express his dissatisfaction.

Having reached the drawbridge of that particular “box”, he was met by a heavily armed Sentry (P.A. in the modern parlance). And what a damn fine Sentry she was too. She was not gonna let this marauder through - who knows what death and destruction this savage might wreak if he penetrated the inner sanctum of the Big Chief “Advertising Manager”.

Here is the transcript of the first part of the engagement:

“Is Mr “x” in”?

“I’m not sure. I’ll check. May I say whose calling”?

“My name is Mr “y””

“Does he know you”

“No, not yet. I’m a customer”

“Can you tell me what it’s about”

“No, I want to tell Mr “x” what it’s about”

Now, in these first, brief verbal exchanges, it is patently clear that the carefully constructed defences surrounding the Advertising Manager’s “box” are effective and well practised.

But the question is begging to be asked  “What, if not to talk to customers, is, in fact, the role of a newspaper’s Advertising Manager”?

And the answer? 

Well I think I gave that to you in the opening paragraphs – building, protecting and nurturing his territory as defined by the “box” in which he operates.

During the course of the last couple of years, I have increasingly caught glimpses of what I have come to describe as  “ill concealed contempt for the customer”. It is a worrying trend and it is continuing to gain momentum. Indeed, the Advertising Manager skirmish would be an example that I would classify under this heading.

And here is another one.

When you can find a few spare moments in your busy lives, pop into a fast food burger restaurant and conduct this sophisticated test of market orientation. I have done this now many times. So many times, in fact, that my family now refuses to come within a thousand paces of me and a fast food restaurant.

Appproach the counter and order their Big Whopper or whatever the premium buger of that chain happens to be. When you receive it nicely nestled in its polystyrene clam shell, don’t move away from the counter as you normally would. But pause a moment. This will create a queue of several people behind you but do not be pressured by this. 

At about this moment, the youth behind the counter will likely say something questioning to you like “Yous want fires?”  Politely offer a “No thank you” whilst opening the polystyrene clamshell and gazing at the contents. (By this time the queue will have swelled further but do not be distracted from your mission)

Now lift your gaze, slowly, to the large 30 x 40 colour photograph or back lit transparency on the wall above or to the side of the counter.

And now return your gaze, equally slowly, to the contents of your polystyrene clamshell.

And now pronounce your concern to the counter assistant thus:

“There appears to have been some mistake. I ordered one of those” you say, indicating the pictorial representation on the wall.

Confused, the assistant is likely to say something to you along the lines of “Yous got one of those”

Now lean across the counter and get the assistance to direct his/her gaze into your clamshell and put it to them thus:

“No, really, look. I haven’t got one of those”

And have you got “one of those” ?

Of course not. You, nor anyone else, has ever or will ever, have “one of those”.

Because it is simply not possible to produce one of those without the $15,000 photography budget, the controlled environment of the studio, the visualiser, art director, food stylist, food technologist, photographer and the collection of ingredients that, in the most part, do not even constitute “food”. followed by the sophisticated photographic processing techniques and technology that is employed to produce the print in all its magnificent glory, full of culinary promise 

No, you haven’t got “one of those”. 

And to me, simple soul that I am, if I am promised one thing and then, in return for my money, I am consistently (and with malice aforethought) provided with something else, then that is contempt for me, the customer. This plays no part in market orientation as far as I understand it.

And you will have experienced or witnessed this phenomenon too - you just need to look carefully.

So, back now, to the original question: “What Is Marketing Anyway”, The answer comes in two parts.

The first part is to record what Marketing is not.

Marketing is not a “Box” or a “Department” or a “Function” or a “Job Description”. 

Marketing is not limited to a set of “tools’ (advertising, direct mail, sales promotion, PR etc.) That stuff might better be described as Marketing Communications or, perhaps, Marketing Services.

Marketing is not “someone else’s problem” - a frequently heard remark from someone who inhabits a different “box”.

Marketing is everyone’s problem. Everyone’ concern. Everyone’s responsibility.

Marketing is a “State of Mind” that every organisation and the people in it must have if they are to compete effectively in an increasingly competitive environment.

Marketing must mean that every single person working with & for an organisation must think like a mini-Marketing Director. That every strategy, every activity, every decision made is made with the customer’s requirements and perspective at the very top of their mind.

After all, the cashier in a Bank sees more customers in a week than the Marketing Director sees in a year. And yet, for too many organisations, this powerful reality is ignored.

For too long, organisational thinking has seen Finance as being at the centre of the universe. 

It is not. 

In this country we have recently seen a dramatic example of what was a Marketing Oriented business thriving on every dimension being destroyed, in just three years, by the removal of marketing from that central and pivotal role and its replacement with finance as the day by day, minute by minute, second by second, driving force. The money men killed Levenes.

Marketing is at the centre of the universe. 

Marketing is what drives business. 

After all, the only people that I have ever found that make the cash register ring is customers. So it makes sense to me that it we want to make the till ring often then customers are where we should be focussing our attention. They are not a necessary evil (as they seem to be regarded in some organisations) they are the very reason for existing – they are where the money comes from.

And that means a heck of a lot more than having a team of bright young things in a department or “box” called ‘Marketing”. It means so much more than having a carefully crafted Customer Service Strategy with posters stuck on staff room walls proclaiming the Customer as king.

It means so much more than the implementation of expensively crafted advertising campaigns supported by technologically sophisticated DM programmes where no quantifiable objectives have been set and where, if asked what the ROI on that Programme was, the Marketing Manager hasn’t got the foggiest – but hey, it won an award!

I have recently worked with a major client organisation in New Zealand who, during the briefing process, proudly presented to me a copy of their Marketing Plan for which they had, but a few days before, won an Award.

And exquisitely presented it was too. Many colours, many sections, many appendices, Many words. And such a lovely front cover with the author’s name on it.

But is contained one of the biggest piles of waffle, bunkum and balderdash I had ever seen. 

The entire 100 page plus document lacked a single measurable or quantifiable objective.

And, given that it lacked these things it was no surprise that it also lacked a single mechanism for measuring performance of the Plan against any Objectives.

It was, at best, a discussion document based on hunch, hope, mythology and divine illumination! And it won an award! Oh what I would give to see the other entries!!

Effective marketing is a serious business. Indeed, effective Marketing is about the entire business of being in and doing business.

Businesses that have been in an almost perpetual state or reorganisation, restructuring, downsizing, right sizing and all the other lemming like and finance driven strategies of “mucking about” need to undertake one last restructure – a restructuring to take on a true market orientation where, as you all, by now, know, businesses consistently outperform the rest on pretty much all of the performance dimensions that matter.

That’s what marketing is. It is the entire business of doing business. It is the entire business of doing business with the core reality of the customer as sole cash provider at the forefront of everyone’s mind.

I have recently come to the conclusion that if a business is not, in itself, a marketing organism then it is nothing. It is then, in my view, a very short step to regard the terms marketing and business as interchangeable. Now there’s a thought for marketing educators and practitioners alike!

And that’s going to require CEOs who understand Marketing, entire staffs who understand the simple principles of marketing and willingly can adopt a Marketing State of Mind and its going to require Marketing professionals who are trained in a bit more than the Four Ps

And it is certainly going to require a very substantial change in approach in post graduate education where, currently, in many MBA programmes, marketing is offered as an option!

I shall leave you with that final thought and thank you for your kind and considerate attention.

Good afternoon.