I’ve been mulling over a debate for the past few weeks and haven’t been able to resolve it, so I thought I’d share it here and get your input.

The issue is whether marketers should try to increase the marketing function in the organization or whether they should try to increase the marketing capability of the entire organization.  The debate was prompted by an op-ed written by Larry Light, marketing guru and former McDonald’s CMO, in Forbes a few weeks ago.

Larry’s piece, entitled “Marketing Is Being Devalued,” argues that marketing “needs to assert its rightful role making it the central force of brand-business management.”  Larry outlines the 5 reasons he believes marketing is not fulfilling its business management role, including lack of organizational alignment, a trust deficit, and a measurement mindset which stifles marketing.

He warns, “Marketing as we know it will continue to decline unless we move to reform marketing and transform the CMO from a marketing communications leader to a brand-business leader.”

At first blush, I couldn’t agree with Larry more.  I share his concern about marketing being a short-term, tactics-based function.  Marketing is so much more than ad campaigns and taglines. I even recently penned a piece for my new Brand New Perspectives column in QSR Magazine about the expansive, impactful role that the most effective CMOs play. Particularly in these times when companies are focusing on growing the topline, marketing should be the engine which drives new growth.

But upon further reflection, I realize that making the marketing role more important may not be the answer.  Perhaps the goal shouldn’t be to elevate the marketing function within companies, but rather to make marketing the function of companies.

That is, perhaps companies should organize their people, build systems and processes, align resources and prioritize, and build capability throughout the organization so that the entire enterprise executes the marketing role.  I believe this is what Peter Drucker was referring to in his famous quote, “Because the purpose of business is to create a customer, the business enterprise has two–and only two–basic functions: marketing and innovation…Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business.”

Many of you know that I advocate for the “brand as business (TM)” management approach. “Brand as business” involves the deliberate and systematic management of the business around the brand.  It impacts all business functions – from generating insights, to making planning decisions, and to facilitating operational excellence.  As such, “brand as business” is not a marketing undertaking; it’s a business model led by the top executives and executed by everyone in the organization.

When I speak to marketing folks about “brand as business,” I tell them that it’s not enough for the marketing department to “get it.” It requires everyone in the organization to shift their identity from their traditional job description, instead thinking of themselves as operators of the brand, who develop, maintain, and activate the brand across all of their activities.

So marketing shouldn’t be vying for bigger budgets for marketing and bigger jobs or titles.  Their goal should be a brand as business organization and their job is to find ways to convey the importance of brand to every person in the company – to persuade them to adopt brand as business.

I think this way of thinking applies to the marketing function in general.  Take customer insights.  It’s counter-productive for an elite few to claim ownership of customer understanding.  Likewise identifying creative ways to engage customers may indeed be marketing’s bailiwick but unless the ideas are are co-developed with other functional areas, operational considerations will be overlooked and their viability, unlikely.  The understanding of customers, the development of value propositions, and the broad application of brand values must be aligned and integrated throughout the organization.

Larry Light argues that

• the CMO is responsible for building and managing the brand-business plan,
• the CMO is the voice of the customer, whether a BTB customer or a consumer.
• the CMO is the customer advocate.
• the CMO must lead the effort to drive true customer-insight focused innovation.
• the CMO should lead the effort to break down organizational silos.

And a side of me wants to stand up and shout “amen!”  But I wonder, shouldn’t everyone in the organization be doing these things?  Shouldn’t everyone seek to better understand customers and advocate for doing what’s best for them?  Shouldn’t everyone work together to develop innovations based on customer insights?  Shouldn’t everyone tear down silos and contribute to building the brand?

This is not to say that there’s no need for a marketing department or that marketing doesn’t play an important role in an organization.  Marketing establishes and cultivates the critical conduit with the “outside world” – communicating and delivering brand value from the inside out and gathering insights and sourcing tools and resources to bring inside for the entire organization to use.   Depending on which way you look at it, either this sounds like the functional expertise and value of marketing is diminished; or it paints a bigger vision for marketing.

So, what do you think?  Should we be concerned that marketing is being devalued?  Or should we be excited about making marketing something everyone in the organization does?  Please share your thoughts!

related posts:

• the business reset button
• gaining the competitive edge

I’ve been thinking about the importance of connecting the internal organization with external customers.  All too often it seems companies are either too inwardly focused, getting too caught up in their own capabilities, technologies, and process — or too outwardly focused, trying to be everything to everyone and ending up being nothing to no one.

My thoughts were sparked by a proposal I’ve been working on. It’s for a well-known company with a what most people would agree is a really strong brand.  So imagine my surprise when I learned they were seeking a resource for “brand discovery.”  At first blush, it didn’t seem to me that they needed any help.

But then as I immersed myself into their situation, I realized their issue is connecting the internal to the external.  Their internal culture and passion for their brand is really admirable, but what they seem to missing is an intimacy with the customer.  I believe they need to connect their internal strength with external customer understanding and passion — knowing which segments in the prospect pool are the most fertile for them, knowing how to connect with them, and channeling their energies toward delivering value to them.

At the same time some companies are so focused on the market, they don’t have an internal bedrock to ground their efforts, nor an internal compass to guide decision-making.  You know the companies I’m talking about — the ones who seem to be consistently re-positioning themselves — always trying to tie into the latest fad and never presenting a consistent POV.  In a way, these companies pursue “customer centricity” to a fault.

Peter Drucker believed the need to connect “the Inside that is ‘the organization,’ and the Outside of society, economy, technology, markets, and customers” is so vital, he advocated for an organization’s CEO to serve as the link.

I would offer an alternative — the brand is the link.  The way I see it, customer centricity only works when you have a strong brand to act as a filter for prioritizing customer segments and a tool for developing and managing customer relationships.  A brand defines what the company stands for, which in turn determines who it’s for and what value it will deliver.

The brand embodies the “Outside” by defining the value the organization delivers to its customers; and it embodies the “Inside” by defining the way the organization does business.

So my conclusion:  the brand connects the internal and the external. What do you think?  Do you agree? or do you see it a different way?  Please let me know.