The modern “Marketing Concept” is “using the resources of your organization that can be competitively utilized to satisfy the needs or wants of an identifiable and reachable target audience.

So, EXPERT marketers that understand their job is, “The holistic, integrated management of exchange” are equipped with the understanding to self-determine if a business should be closing for a lock down, staying open despite a lock down, of actually redeploying resources and responding to a lock down to satisfy new and unsatisfied needs in the market place.

Think!

Can you do something for those in need?

Can you deliver new things that a group of people of organisations now want?

Can you reorganize your resources that satisfy new markets? Increased demand? Can you develop new products that people NOW want?

Can you develop new products for new markets?

Most good marketers will recognize the Ansoff matrix

Internal Marketing Comes First

Remember, you’ll get no-where fast if you don’t have support, engagement and alignment within your organization.

Does your response of effort to adapt fit with the organizations’ MEVPIV?

For ideal employee and stakeholder engagement and alignment

If not then leadership has to be called into question. and if your leader’s cant embrace change before its too late, get out early.

If leaders are onside, remind them that internal marketing is necessary and leadership has to be overt. Call for enthusiasm, alignment and encouragement from everyone and ask for (and respect) contributions.

And don’t forget…

Act, don’t react: Plan strategically – don’t just embrace reactive tactics

Those who fail to plan, plan to fail.

Think through your strategy. Consider all the implications. Determine contingencies and prepare for them.

YOu marketing plan should not be more than 20 pages, and consider ALL aspects of the marketing mix, and make sure your market research, analsysis, and information is right!

Successful marketing coordinates the codependent parts of the marketing mix, optimally.

The 21st Century’s Most Costly Business Mistake?

Probably the most expensive mistake of the 21st century is perceiving marketing as meaning advertising and promotion.

How the business-world came to close itself off from the science of marketing strategy, the vast and rich knowledge base that makes profitable businesses spark and explode, is a matter of debate…

What has created a world that doesn’t understand the meaning of the word, Marketing?

Is it tertiary marketing education devoid of real world worth, now that academics have significantly displaced practitioners in teaching?

Is it because the efficiency of the medium that is the internet is so profound that the aggressive snake-oil hawking of digital promoters, describing themselves as marketers, without understanding anything beyond rudimentary marketing communications tactics?

Is it because the leaders of sophisticated marketing organisations are hording the knowledge because it represents such potent and potentially sustainable competitive advantage for them if they keep it to themselves?

Is it because the marketing professional has fought off mandatory accreditation and control… so that anyone can say they are a marketer without challenge?

Or could it be that middle management and senior executives who have lobbied so hard to rise above their peers in corporate organisations, shout down anyone with knowledge that might interfere with their planned career progression?

Is this due to the fact that over 50% of business executives working in marketing lack ANY tertiary qualifications in the discipline?

Where Did Marketing Go Off the Tracks?

Perhaps, in the ‘80s, if the marketing professional has screamed “wrong” when the term, “direct marketing” was incorrectly coined to describe direct response advertising, the nonsensical term, “content marketing” may not have be adopted and a more accurate phrase to describe “online publicity promotion” might have formed? The same goes for “search engine marketing” which really is “prioritization of search engine ranking”. (At least somebody tried when they coined the phrase “Search Engine Optimization”.)

Poor lay people are left in a soup of confusion daily when terms sprout such as “Influencer Marketing” which is simply utilization of group opinion leaders to disperse information utilization  in context with the multi-stage mass communication model.

Whatever the causes, the cost is incalculable!

How much damage is done when people are unaware that they must balance the 8P’s of marketing scientifically if they are to protect their companies from sub-optimal profits?

How destructive is it when quality executives are appointed to roles they THINK they can handle when they are simply ill-equipped with inadequate training and knowledge to make strategic marketing decisions?

How profound are the losses as the commercial world graciously accepts the dominoes that are retail chains collapsing world-wide, without even questioning that these occurrences might be a clue that the leadership models in business are faulty?

How corrosive is it when employees simply leave their jobs in frustration because their corporate guidelines are soiled by silos, blurred by secret agenda, eroded by office politics, undermined by poor morale?

How much worse does this make frustrated middle management as they vent on their own staff because they are fighting a losing battle with the same demons they are creating because of complacent leadership and corporate governance?

Even though Gartner, Inc,  have made $4B a year reminding us that employee engagement has been consistently around 25% of all employees since they began surveying it in 2002, where is evidence of quality internal marketing?

History will tell a sorry tale.

How they will giggle in decades to come when the historians recall the anecdotes of 21st century  business people ignoring the lessons of history only to repeat the mistakes.

Students of Marketing in the future may shake their heads in disbelief when they discover that the body of real knowledge was not in universities, but secreted away in the coffers of just a few large companies and consultancies, remaining virtually known except to only to a few outsiders.

Incidentally, on the topic of academia worth and value to the business world…

Is Academia Failing Society BIG-TIME?

For years I’ve have complained that the focus of Universities on “publish or perish” instead of “teach well and share knowledge” is a big mistake.

So, I couldn’t help capturing this post when I found it on the web recently…

Who cares about your PhD thesis?

Colin Riegels, Doctoral candidate: Law, University of Oxford

There is an old joke about this: only five people will ever read your doctoral thesis.

  •     You
  •     Your supervisor
  •     Your two examiners
  •     Your unlucky spouse/boyfriend/girlfriend who has to act as unpaid proof-reader for you

In 99.9% of cases, nobody else will ever read it or care what it says.

When I arrived at Oxford I went to the archives and checked out a number of completed doctoral theses in my field so I could read them and get a flavour of what they are meant to be like. In every single case except for one, I was the first person ever to check them out. And, in each case, they weren’t randos – I picked those ones because they were names that I recognised as people who went on to enjoy success in the field.

By the time I read this post, it had 203,900 views and been liked or shared over 6,100 times! Academia KNOWS its failings yet academia are ignoring (laughing at!) what most certainly will be its downfall!

I imagine historians of the future will share my disdain of unoriginal, regurgitated marketing theory being submitted as justification for their existence by the incumbent  pure academics in power now, representing a fake body of knowledge,  thrown up as a smoke screen to disguise it profound absence of advancement; too crammed with irrelevant and unusable findings  that the “publish or perish” mandate has forced them to create.

Do you remember EVERYTHING you learned at Uni?

Many graduates in business, who I have talked with, admit they don’t remember everything they were taught at Uni.

Some confessed cramming just days before an exam, scraping by with a “Pass” and forgetting much of what they learned within months, or weeks, if not days, afterwards.

Insightful ones have wished they remembered the lessons learned when years later they were faced with important decision-making on topics that were discussed in their final capstone subjects.

I certainly experienced this, even as a part-time student who enjoyed the advantage of learning and applying my studies as I went. When I taught at Uni, in particularly in my MBA subjects, I had to relearn and learn the subject matter perfectly, to make sure I was perfectly capable of explaining and elaborating on complex and advanced business models.

My own, most outstanding commercial successes have always been based upon the correct and loyal adoption of some valuable and profound business models, concepts and findings learned in my marketing, business and strategy studies.

40 years of Executive Know-How… crammed into 2 days!

I’ve collated these into a concise and helpful commercial “bundle” that I’m sharing in my upcoming workshop, designed to empower senior managerial, marketing, strategy and planning executives.

Marketing Training for Senior Executives

If any of my LinkedIn connections (or their network) would like to attend, and find out the keys, tricks, methods, tools, rules, laws and models that help medium and large companies make millions, I’ve posted the link below and would be thrilled to see you at the event.

If you’d like to know more, go to https://www.informa.com.au/event/training/a-practical-guide-to-marketing/

Is it Time to Change the Way We Remunerate Recruiters?

 

As someone who is champion to the science of Marketing, many an executive throws down a gauntlet for me in terms of Marketing innovation: In a recent Pricing Workshop, someone challenged me to develop a better “model of exchange” in recruitment. Well here goes…

 

For a long time, some business leaders have harboured a certain dissatisfaction in the price-value equation for recruitment services in Australia.

 

For employers, there has been a suspicion that recruiters are paid excessively for what they do. For recruiters, there is a perception of the importance of correct recruitment that justifies their high commissions. For applicants, there is a frustration that they have been screened out with inadequate diligence, and that recruiters deliver an inefficient service to both applicants and employers.

 

Recruiters argue commissions of 30% of more for senior and key appointments are justified, citing “costs and overheads” that form an impeccable service. Sophistications such as advanced CV screening, diligent and deep reference-checking, background research, best-quality personality testing and other “overheads” are presented as depth and value in the service provided, giving the employer the best chance of securing an “A-class” candidate.

 

However, recruiters are very quick to limit their liability to a three-month trial period, before the waive all responsibility and leave the joined match to its own future.

 

For quality candidates who refuse to lie or exaggerate in their CV, there is a loss of trust in a system that doesn’t give a honest applicant a “fair go”.

 

A bad appointment can mean the end with blame being purposeless

All too often the employee doesn’t reveal weaknesses or inability to deliver until well past that point… with employers discovering all too late that they should have employed someone else.

 

Recruiters blame their clients for incomplete or inappropriate briefs, or simply the decision responsibility being beyond their mandate.

 

Employers blame recruiters for presenting tool limited a field of appropriate candidates, not consulting in a fiduciary manner, filling the brief rather than offering alternative (better?) options, of simply doing a personality match rather than a skills/competence match.

 

Regardless, a bad appointment can mean loss of profits, milestone negative implications that can extend to downturn, loss of jobs, or even the end of the organisation.

 

A Better Way to Remunerate Recruiters?

It is only right and proper that recruiters who genuinely match the best possible candidate to the right employers be handsomely rewarded.

 

At the other end of the spectrum, it is also unproductive to reward recruiters if they present inappropriate, badly selected, unsuitable or inadequately competent candidates.

 

An alternative Model to Reward Recruiters

What if recruiters could be rewarded for quality of employee service?

What if recruiters could be rewarded for duration of employee service?

What if recruiters could be rewarded for contribution to employee performance?

Wouldn’t it be fairer if recruiters shared in employees’ bonuses?

Wouldn’t it be fairer if recruiters shared in employees’ salary increases?

Wouldn’t it be fairer if recruiters shared in employees’ career progression?

I wonder if it is time to reward recruiters with a superior win/win/win approach?

How about rewarding recruiters on a longer-term basis? What if they were paid an override for every year of service? 10 years in the job would be a great appointment – worthy of a handsome commission. 18 months of hair-pulling agony, sub-optimal results, and organisational disharmony not rewarded significantly means recruiters have “skin-in-the game”.

The override could include bonuses and pay-rises… that would be fair too, while NOT receiving huge commissions for appointing short-duration candidates would also be fair.

 

FEEDBACK Please!

I genuinely would like to hear comments on this … form recruiters, employers AND candidates… it could be an opportunity to bring about constructive change… but if it is not, I’d like to hear other thoughts.

There is a crisis of engagement. With 87% of employees disengaged worldwide, Gallup states in a 2016 report that “employee engagement has barely budged in years”. In the United States and Australia these figures are 68% and 76% respectively. These levels of disengagement represent billions of dollars in costs to organisations and governments.

Why are so many employees disengaged? How can organisations increase engagement? What effect do disengaged customers, students, welfare recipients and other stakeholders have on the bottom line and on organisational success? How can you find a superior means to overcome these engagement problems?

With a market in need of a viable solution, management has to address the symptoms, the foundations and find the solution, including a next generation of engagement tools.

Leaders MUST address the issues, the direct & indirect costs, the effect on customer experience, and the philosophies around minimising, and explore new & engaging methodology to deal with this problem.

MARKET STATUS QUO

Increasing employee engagement investments of 10% can increase profits by $2,400 per employee, per year. (Source: Workplace Research Foundation). Employers are rapidly catching on to the positive ROI of investing in their employee engagement efforts.

Highly engaged employees are 38% more likely to have above-average productivity. (Source: Workplace Research Foundation). This is a huge part of where we see increased profits coming from. Kevin Kruse (@Kruse) coined a great term to define this ripple effect that employee engagement tends to have on an organization, he calls it, “The Engagement Profit Chain”.

Companies that foster engaged brand ambassadors in their workforce report an average of 2.69 sick days taken annually per employee, compared to companies with weak engagement efforts, reporting an average of 6.19 sick days. (Source: Workplace Research Foundation). Sick days can be very costly in the way of lost productivity and reduced workplace morale. Reducing these costs is just another benefit associated with employee engagement efforts.

Companies with engaged employees, outperform those without by 202%. (Source: Dale Carnegie). “Employee engagement is the emotional commitment the employee has to the organization and its goals. This emotional commitment means engaged employees actually care about their work and their company. They don’t work just for a pay-cheque, or just for the next promotion, but work on behalf of the organization’s goals.” – Kevin Kruse

Companies that implement regular employee feedback have turnover rates that are 14.9% lower than for employees who receive no feedback. (Source: Gallup). This is a big one folks! There are a lot of estimates on the cost of employee turnover, and honestly, that number is going to be different for each employee, location and company. The exact number doesn’t matter as much as the prevention of that cost. What is employee turnover costing you?

Only about 25% of business leaders have an employee engagement strategy. (Source: Dale Carnegie). There’s another powerful statistic. The benefits of building an engaged workforce are undeniable, yet so many companies haven’t made the investment yet. This disconnect seems like the opportunity for a strong competitive advantage over the other 75% of companies who don’t have a strategy.

The numbers don’t lie, organizations are going to need to invest in employee engagement in order to stay competitive, drive productivity and improve the bottom line.

THE FIRST STEP

Leaders need to develop sincere, motivating, inspiring alignment of teams for many reasons… Remove silos, undo secret agenda, create unity of effort, inspire initiative, minimise mistakes, etc.

At Launch Engineering, we deal with this under the “8th “P” of Marketing, “Politics”… were we recognise that Internal Marketing is key to Marketing Strategy & Planning. Readers should contact Launch engineering or visit…

http://www.launchengineering.com/MissionVision.htm

 

 

Brand Equity Grows with Business Productivity from People

Engagement Levels Around the World

“The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing: Violate them at your own risk”. (Reis, A., & Trout, J. – 1993)” still inspires debate, reflection and grounding among professional marketers.

In reality, it’s an empirically proven list of importance leadership tools for quality CEO’s to consider in the course of nurturing a business.

Entering my 40th year in business, I reflect more frequently on the absolute truth of Law 18, the Law of Success, that says, “Success often leads to arrogance, and arrogance to failure.”

One quip about consulting goes, “The people who want your advice don’t need it and people who need your advice don’t want it.”

This is so true with my existing clients right now… the one’s that collaboratively share, and open their minds, grow profitably and consistently…

Looking back over my career (this is not about me, per se, but demonstrations of real outcomes)

It was a humble executive that asked my to derive a strategy 30 years ago that has delivered $250M p.a. in sales for a FMCG brand that his company had fail on launch. It was humility that opened the minds of a large transport company, so I could create strategy that allowed them to find $250M in profit that had alluded them for years.

It was a humble pharmaceutical Marketing Director that opened his mind to my interpretation of academic models that created a new product line in analgesics that has generated $320M of sales in the past 20 years.

On the other hand…

It was sheer corporate arrogance that has stopped Australia’s leading retailer from securing $400M increase in EBT per annum since 2007.

It was defiant arrogance that had a senior finance executive turn his back on me when I suggested I might be able to help his bank deal with troubled divisions, resulting in a 2.5% slump in share price as a result.

When I warned Australia’s Childcare chain, there were indicators that showed they needed my help, told me they didn’t need help… two years before they went bust… the same with Sydney’s oldest confectionery manufacturer.

A few years ago leading Singapore Corporation told me they knew it all and pursued a 6-Sigma project. It ended up costing them $750K and they generated a 0.5% increase in profits as a result. Comparatively, my firm took the same idea to a similar corporation (without arrogant executives) in Thailand, that cost them only $150,000 and generated a massive 22% increase in profit.

When asked, as a child, what I wanted to be when I grew up, I naively answered, “A time and efficiency expert”. In my earliest learning years, I studied for a decade and a half to just to empower myself with the kernel of understanding that needed to grow for another 15 years.

Only in the last decade have I grasped that the key is political finesse and diplomatic charisma, COMBINED with street scars and academic knowledge, but the Catch-22 is that a single individual cannot possess both charm and ability. Arrogance is a cross that some bare openly and others try to conceal and other, still, deny exists.

Leaders can develop a culture that can hamper arrogance, but arrogant leaders will nourish it. Yet is seems unavoidable. Perhaps it is the business circle of life… creating opportunity for new, fresh organisations to grow, while mega corporations choke to death on it?

I’d be interested to hear what others perceive regarding Law 18, please comment, particularly if you have answers to dealing with Corporate Arrogance.

One of the profound things I learned after 13 years studying “Marketing” at Uni, from tutoring & lecturing in “Marketing” to MBA students and debating “Marketing” with my peers, is the commercial advantage of using academic knowledge that has meaning and relevance in the commercial environment.

FOR MARKETING CONSULTANTS

One of the things taught in higher Economics is that “super-normal” profits only comes to businesses that fall into the economic industry-classification of “Monopolies” or “Monopolistic Competition” (e.g. Oligopolies), while industries where competitors, existing in “Perfect Competition”, inevitably will not maintain long-term “super-normal” profits.

Likewise, in Strategic Marketing Industry Life Cycle Analysis, we KNOW that high margins and premium pricing is much more difficult in “Market Maturity” than in “Growth” and that all industries are likely to enter “Industry Shakeout” at early Maturity stage, primarily because it is more profitable to merge, than it is to grow organically.

Experts among us might shout “in professional services, price is a yardstick of quality” and “Price is in-elastic” but only when the service is heterogeneous in the mind of the buyer.

Product Management “Product Analysis” theory tells us that augmented product metamorphosises into actual product over time – in the case of Marketing Consulting this means clients expect Marketing Consultants to know more, deliver more, contribute more, be more…

History shows formidable marketing successes over the past 40 years have routinely originated by applying higher-level strategic marketing models, so are we NOT  being negligent in ignoring these rules in any marketing consulting business, and industry?

There is a saying, “Only a fool knows everything” that might convert to, “Everybody has something uniquely special they can contribute”… Even Philip Kotler said, “Marketing takes a day to learn and a lifetime to master”, although I’d debate this… I believe Marketing takes a lifetime to learn and is impossible for a single individual to “master”.

Why No Single Marketing Consultant Has ALL the Answers

Think about it… There are 8 “P’s” of Marketing… The 4 “P’s” that everyone (who does a basic business course) learns: Price, Product, Place & Promotion…. are the simplest, but even these  simple topics are complex and extensive.

For instance, JUST “Promotion” breaks down to:
1. Advertising,
2. Public Relations,
3. Sales Promotions, and
4. Personal Selling

… AND, that small subset called “ADVERTISING”, requires professional training in Mass media (Digital, TV, Radio, Print to name a few), direct marketing (CRO online, post, off-the-page, and others), web (YouTube, SEO, PPC, SEM, SMM, CRO, content)… each requiring creative, production, media buying and implementation skills…. coordinated with position, targeting, segmentation, buyer behaviour, buyer adoption stage… and 1001 other professional specializations.
… BUT PROMOTION ALSO INCLUDES Public Relations, Sales Promotions, and Personal Selling… which are all (if not more) as complex and arduous as advertising.

How can an Advertising Expert be a Marketing Expert?

Look at “PRODUCT”… there’s branding, portfolio management, new product development, market research management, packaging, product typing, product differentiation, product management… and on… There’s Boston Matrix, Ansoff Matrix, Brand Equity Management, the Product-Service continuum, levels of involvement, etc, etc and all these vary across 2-5 segments!!!

How can a Product Management Expert be a Marketing Expert?

“PLACE (Distribution)” and “PRICING” are even more complex and divergent… and that is before we move into PEOPLE, PROCESSES and so on…

… and then the synergy can be lost by silos that divide (and cannabalise) marketing efficiencies…

What Would Marketing Consultants Do (in Theory) to Maximise Their Value, their Efficiency & Their Profits?

The business world NEEDS to understand & adopt adopt the “Hierarchies of Marketing” – or some model like it – because, right now, the profession nurtures those who “don’t know how much they don’t know” as employers, naive of the depth and breadth of the discipline of “Marketing”, hire one person to be a jack of all trades instead of many that they should really recruit. (Feel free to request a copy of my [free] e-book, “The Four Faces of Marketing”.)

There is opportunity businesses to make HUGE bounds forward by NOT hiring a ‘gun’ Marketing Manager, for say $170,000 pa, but appointing a Marketing Consultancy for the same money and getting a team of leading experts who collaborate and delegate work to team member/s best qualified to deliver exceptionally good output.

There is a HUGE win/win here… the customer gets BETTER STRATEGIC MARKETING input, and generates better marketing OUTPUT, makes more money, re-invests more… and the marketing firm shares success accordingly.

The only ‘catch’ is the marketing consultancy HAS to deliver exceptional, extraordinary marketing… which no individual can possibly do.

My colleagues and I incorporated Launch Engineering 10 years ago and brought in the best possible minds we knew – in the key areas of Market Research, Information Management, Digital Implementation, and so on, but a small, boutique firm will always reach a flattened sales curve: The world isn’t quite beating a path to our firm’s door as much as we’d like. Why? Well there’s a host reasons that go beyond this post, albeit great strategists cannot yet be 100% brilliant in all operational marketing disciplines.

Should boutique marketing consultancies merge, or compete, and why?

If other marketing consultancies, reading this, see some merit to the points I’ve made, perhaps they would care to offer some feedback and comment… … and tell me, “Should boutique marketing consultancies merge or compete, and why?”

If you’ve read this far and want to delve deeper into Marketing “science”, PLEASE read (for free) about the Hierarchies of Marketing, and other marketing issues, in this e-book by downloading from this address…
http://bookboon.com/en/the-four-faces-of-marketing-ebook