Why one + one is not proper integrated sales and marketing

Today I will discuss four commons silos that if not handled, will perpetuate the glass ceiling that often impedes true integration.

Read more

The integration philosophy is born from seven concurrent trends (for more on this, stay tuned), but the challenge is that each "one" tends to function in its own differing ways. In effect, true integration often stalls very quickly because we look for limited bridges between one or two areas in our organization, versus looking for customer-led moments where we can test, prove and broadcast the value of integration across a much wider gamut.


Seven drivers of integration:

1. Wastage: Marketing is increasingly under pressure to show ROI. Integration portrays much less of a “waste-oriented mantra” than channel-only or share of voice (driven by awareness activities).

2. C-suite lexographic shift: Increasingly c-suites talk about customer journeys and pathways. These views need a more customer-based lens. Integration offers a logical step towards achieving this by talking about combining elements through the journey.

3. Online makes it much easier to track and act faster: Social and digital allow you to track activities in near real-time. This means it is a touch easier to monitor, or at least correlate with simple regressions. For example, what happens when activity A and activity B happen together or in sequence? It is about measurable baby steps to some (apologies for misquoting Bill Murray in the film What About Bob).

4. Budget shortsightedness: SOX forces a lot of late-in-the-quarter investment models and it rarely gives marketers time to roll out large, complex programs. Integration offers a simple process that feels closed-looped enough to quickly justify a change in short-term available funds by the next quarterly scramble. It feels a little like trench warfare (a few inches at a time), but it is the reality of where we are, especially in U.S.-led organizations.


Read more

"A camel is a horse designed by a committee," so the saying goes.

Read more
PulsePoint Group
March 14, 2011

A recap of last week's POV posts:

Read more

Time Inc. CEO Jack Griffin was recently ousted after less than six months on the job. An agent of change within the organization, his approach to overhauling the ailing media organization clearly didn't mesh with what his organization was ready for. Griffin's demise reminds me of the stellar job Louis Gerstner did when faced with a struggling IBM in the early 1990's. One of the greatest examples of a change agent succeeding, Gerstner was responsible for changing the entire direction of an organization that until he took over was looking to break up its business into smaller units and dissolve others. Today, IBM is a singular technology services powerhouse thanks to Gerstner's strategic vision and ability to guide the company through a massive change in culture.

Read more

Originally Published PR Week, September 24, 2010

In conducting research recently on best practices in corporate communications functions, one thing in particular struck me.

In decentralized organizations, the best chief communications officers aspire to have large chunks of their time allocated for…nothing.

Let me explain.

The larger the enterprise, particularly when decentralized and matrixed, the more complex, the more players, the more issues, etc.  As such, the CCO is required to do all those things with which most of us are familiar: CEO counselor, communications strategist, leader of a large organization, responsible for talent management, etc., etc.

And then some.

Read more

Originally Published PR Week, June 25, 2010

We’ve all been through SWOT exercises and, if you’re like me, you’ve often wondered if the process – sometimes painstaking and laborious – really yields actionable insight.
Lately I’ve had the opportunity to create and lead what I would call “Quantified SWOTS” and, perhaps not surprisingly, the quantification makes the end product more precise and actionable.

You may want to consider it. Let me explain.

Perhaps you’re considering the future of your own organization and want to do a self-assessment. Typical solution: SWOT.

But try this variation.

Work with your team and develop a master list of attributes that you believe your function has responsibility for within your company. The list, of course, includes things like leadership communications support, CSR, media outreach, employee engagement, etc. Break this down and be as specific as you like.

Read more

Originally Published PR Week, February 12, 2010

The impact of social media on how business is run is just starting to mainstream in corporate America. I'm not talking about online promotional campaigns; I'm taking about the very heart of how business is conducted.

The consequence is a redefinition and reframing of how a company and its various stakeholders relate to one another and the impact each has on one another.

Call it “The Engaged Enterprise.” Engagement is the new currency. It suggests an authentic, dynamic, deeper relationship in which conversation and business ideas are shared up, down, and sideways.

In the Engaged Enterprise, stakeholders have deeper relationships with the company. Stakeholders actually talk to one another. Their voices are heard, respected, even acted upon in exchange for their loyalty. The result: The enterprise is smarter and more engaged with their constituents leading to better decisions and deeper, longer-lasting relationships.

Some examples? Consider these three:

Read more

Jon Iwata, SVP of Marketing and Communications at IBM, on how IBM is integrating marketing and communications.

Read more

Ray Jordan, Corporate VP of Public Affairs and Corporate Communication at Johnson & Johnson, on the organizational philosophy of J&J and the corporate communications group and how they maintain consistency.

Read more