A Dynamic Approach to Structuring Marketing Teams

Consumer behaviour and how we communicate has changed. In response, business leaders are reshaping marketing teams. In this period of adjustment, ambiguity around the role of marketing is growing as various structural models are being trialled.

"People shop and learn in a whole new way compared to just a few years ago, so marketers need to adapt or risk extinction." 

Quote Brian Halligan, CEO Hubspot.

There are various views and expectations around how marketing teams should operate and what they are responsible for. The mix of competencies required and structural fit is up for debate. 

Emerging areas of expertise, big data analytics and socialisation of communications requires new competencies. While marketing effectiveness becomes more and more interwoven with technology, the structural frameworks are still evolving.

Consider just a few areas of thought impacting the structural design of a marketing team. Considerations such as:

- Should digital and social media expertise be integrated into existing roles or defined as a specialised skill set?

- Do the skill sets sit in an area of marketing excellence or in other functional areas within the business?
- Are marketing services shared or divisionalised?

- Where does expertise for communications, marketing technology and creative services sit?

- What does the term Marketing mean within the business relative to Sales and Corporate functions?

There is clearly a need to adapt quickly and be flexible in determining the most effective structure. The challenge being to ensure that the rest of the business is clear about the model 'in play.'

Roles are emerging within marketing with newly created titles and areas of focus. These roles come and go, and are distinct from the expected disciplines. The result is  that marketing is perceived as an area of unrest, always chasing the latest fade rather then making a proven contribution. A real problem for positioning the area in the short term. 

Also, within organisations the need for effective communications and design is required by a range of departments. Skill sets that were once the exclusive domain of marketing are in high demand across organisations. This can lead to resources being distracted from an external focus and being over stretched. Diluting the effectiveness and single minded focus of marketing teams.

Initiatives such as employee branding, talent acquisition campaigns, corporate issue management via social channels, internal social network building, influencer blogging, on-line content generation - all require talents that traditionally sit in marketing areas. Structural considerations need to recognise this trend and dynamic.

Marketing leaders must be quick adaptors and comfortable with structural 'trial and error' to achieve optimal team performance. Bringing other parts of the organisation into the loop as the group reinvents itself is necessary to overcome the ambiguity created by change.

Marketing skills are needed more than ever across business disciplines to improve communications and implement creative solutions. This high internal demand requires a structural model that enables a balance between creative service expertise and 'go to market' initiative.

This all results in the credibility of marketing being under question - adapt or become extinct. Marketing leaders therefore need to focus on clearly articulating their vision,  what they do and don't do, and how this will deliver on the business plan.

Marketing groups that can not adjust, reinvent themselves with a clear vision of success, and structure with a purpose (even if this changes often) will lose organisational effectiveness. 

It seems crazy to be asking ourselves What is Marketing? 

What's your biggest challenge in building credibility for the marketing function? 

What lessons have you learnt in trialling new structural models?

Retail Stores Can Differentiate Through Humanizing Interactions

 

Retail shopping and on-line shopping may offer similar products, however the experience that shoppers are wanting is very different. The creation of a retail destination needs to tap into an experience beyond the products on offer. Even though the way we shop has evolved our need for social interaction and face to face service remains as strong. The question is can traditional retailing tap into these latent needs to revolutionise the shopping experience in the same way as on-line retailers have.

Product design and displays are the 'hero' when browsing through stores.  Clever product innovation and promotion is abundant. Customers look for

product brands with distinct benefits. Even supermarkets have increased their branded line of products. Product seeking has become a key choice driver for shoppers.

It seems that the focus on the customer experience and service excellence at many retail outlets has given way to product promotion. The retailer customer value proposition is determined by the products on offer. With products being widely available or easily substituted across competing distribution outlets, including on-line shopping sites, loyalty to a retail store brand seems pointless.

In many retail stores it feels as if the customer is an annoyance and self service is expected. This is not a complaint, rather an observation. This had contributed to the growth in on-line shopping as customers have little emotional reason to stay loyal to traditional retailers. The on-line shopping phenomenon highlights the importance of creating a compelling customer value proposition for shoppers.

Virtual retailers have stepped up to deliver reliable service, intuitive on-line user experiences, customised communications, as well as, value for money. They have built a clear customer value proposition and most importantly delivered consistently on their promises.

The successful on-line shopping sites have realised that exceptional user experience offers benefits for shoppers. Quality products attract customers, however it's the shopping experience that converts to sales. Tapping into how 'we want to shop' and delivering this has driven their success.

A great example of how this philosophy has been successfully implemented is the Apple store vs on-line proposition. The on-line experience is about user intuition, access to information, superior functionality and customised on-line communications. The store environment is about customer interaction, knowledge, expertise and training. There are lots of staff and people. To put it simply it's all about 'technology interaction' vs 'human interaction.' As shoppers we desire the benefits of both, and seek them out for different reasons.

Creating a retail destination is the aim of shopping centres and stores. The customer value proposition therefore revolves around 'human interactions.'  It is this focus that differentiates the traditional shopping experience from the on-line one.

It seems that on-line providers have embraced user experience and follow up, where as retailers have lost their focus on their key differentiator. Beyond product and convenience, there is the value proposition of assistance, care and socialisation.

A refocus on human interactions would differentiate retail shop brands. Ways for traditional retail brands to "hero" the experience.

Customer recognition: We all like to be treated like an individual and valued as a customer. Greeting regular customers has a "huge" impact and builds affinity. It does not even have to be by name, just being recognised is enough eg. welcome back. On-line sites create the perception of personalisation with friendly greetings and constant name usage.

Product knowledge: Engaging with staff who do not know anything about the products on offer is frustrating for customers. Potential customers are driven on-line because they feel it is the only way to get information. Having knowledgable staff available for customers to ask questions too or get advice from secures sales.

Engage the senses: Sensory impressions are benefits that on-line shopping  can not provide. Captivating shoppers in an experience beyond the products on offer reinforces the retailer benefits. Even simple hygiene factors such as cleanliness and presentation create an impression.

Customer care and support: Create an environment where staff support each other and customers to create positive experiences. A friendly and welcoming atmosphere is always remembered and positively perceived. It needs to be conveyed in all interactions, including the way staff treat each other. On-line shopping services have the advantage of customers being removed from staff appearances and attitudes impacting on service perceptions.

Unique quality and/or belief: Defining a quality or belief that is unique to the retail brand helps frame the proposition in customers minds. With retailers all offering similar products demonstrating a rational and/or emotional reason for choice can be the most effective way to attract customers.

Intrinsic Drives & Random Buys

"It can attend to more information, react more quickly to emergencies, and keep track of more complicated routes. It never gets angry. It never even blinks. In short, it is better than human in just about every way."  Taken from Wired Magazine; "Let the Robot Drive - The autonomous car of the future is here," February 2012 by Tom Vanderbilt

We make decisions on a 'hunch,' and often buy something that we didn't start out to get. Trying to understand this behaviour in a rational way has been the endeavor of many studies into human decision making behaviour. Understanding why customers make the purchase decisions they do is the 'holy grail' of marketing.

The quote relates to self-driving cars and why they are safer on the road.
It’s a rational reason for embracing this new technology, less human error resulting in safer conditions for driving. The idea played in my mind because it highlights how limited our access to information is when making decisions, and the seemingly random; even careless; behaviours we demonstrate.

In marketing we provide information, brand cues, service and offers to influence purchasing behaviour.  We have a range of mediums and tactics to utilise. Breaking through the clutter in a human mind is a challenge, given the high degree of audio and visual stimulation in the market.

Disregarding irrelevant inputs and distractions is impossible. They influence us in ways we often don't recognise or understand.  Measuring perceptions, subconscious choice drivers, innate preferences and underlying anxieties influencing buying behaviour is difficult.

I was reading on Brandchannel.com an article entitled 'NASCAR Drivers and Fans Juggle Sponsor Logos” posted by Mark J.Miller about the high brand loyalty fans have to team sponsors. Fans indicate that they are 54% more likely to purchase a sponsor product if prices are equal and 11% if the price was higher.  This is not a surprise given the passion these fans have for the sport, resulting in an emotional connection to sponsor products by association.

We process data that has an emotive impact more deeply and faster. It is our way of filtering out some of the clutter. In my experience this includes rational statements, as often this provides an emotional benefit e.g. makes me feel safer, smarter, frugal, responsible, less gullible, less pressured. 

Tapping into these subconscious decision making factors is the biggest challenge for marketers, yet yields the highest returns because it influences behaviour.
After all we are human. Our rational responses often don't calibrate with what we say we will do or even think we will do a lot of the time. When working on the convenience category, stated behaviours did not calibrate to shop item sales data. This was because customers did not remember or did not like to reveal that they had purchased treats such as chocolate bars or a soft drink ‘on a whim.’

Like driving a car, this makes marketing to humans a hazardous and potentially risky endeavour without having some predictive data to assist in strategy development. Always keep in mind that stated behaviours are often different to what people actually do.

Let's face it. This is what also makes marketing interesting the intrinsic drives...the human factor. This is what makes shopping interesting....our random buys.

What are your thoughts?

Building Internal Social Networks that Connect

A reason why internal  social networks fail to achieve higher uptake is the assumption that people who work together will seek to connect with each other.

Self branding and exchanging personal commentary is what external social networking is all about. However, whether individuals desire to mimic similar on-line behaviours in the workplace is questionable. 

An article published on socialbusinessnews.com titled 'Why are so few internal social media networks deemed a success' by Adi Gaskill, indicated that user adoption is the biggest issue. The article cited a report from Information Week 'Rebooting the anti-social network' which indicated that only 13% of IT professionals believed that their companies internal social networks were successful. Most employees preferred to use public tools such as Linkedin or Facebook.

Meyers Briggs (and other popular personality profiling tools) come to mind. An individual's persona and traits is likely to differ in work and home situations.  This insight applies to how individuals engage in social communications behaviour.

How an individual manages their work persona in relation to their personality and interests differs is a work environment. It is managed consciously as part of professional development, authority level and area of expertise. Yet, so often the launch of an internal social network site begins with an internal push to share personal interests, hobbies, family information and experiences. An attempt to mimic external on-line socialising.


Internal social networks have the potential to harness ideas, foster collaboration and breakdown structural barriers. They can provide a way to inform, engage and consolidate knowledge across diverse internal groups. Yet, they are often launched in a way that is trivial to business operations and alienates users.

So how can user adoption be lifted?

1. Clear Purpose and Objectives: I would suggest a good starting point for defining the purpose is to understand the end-user (employee) motivations for utilising the network and how this can deliver on business outcomes.

Place an emphasis on empowering employees to build their internal  professional profile. Provide ways for them to share what they are working on, success stories, and to tap into others expertise. Focus on engaging the internal community in work related conversations and commentary. Assign moderators to encourage exchanges and even seek out teams/individuals to showcase projects.

2. Community Approach: Work place communities share a common interest in organisational success, team and individual recognition, and professional development for future promotion.

Developing a community engagement road map shapes communications planning. It takes the emphasis away from the tool and back to the user group.  It helps identify the type of content and messaging that appeals to the internal audience.

Popular external social networks grow organically with individuals wanting to be associated with the group due to shared interests. Community posts are 'on topic' and can easily be shared.

3. Content Content Content: Scanning the organisation for content that has wide appeal is important. Internal social networks often suffer from a lack of ownership in generating and moderating content.

Interesting content attracts users to the network. Many social networkers are active watchers, information seekers or followers -  not initiators. Good content will seed end-user adoption sooner then directing individuals to contribute information.

As the saying goes for any system - 'Rubbish in, Rubbish out.'  

4.  Utilise Email: Email is still 'king' of business communication. Utilise email communications to lift adoption levels. Provide updates on community activity, content links and new items. Often internal social networks are launched with fanfare, followed by a lack of ongoing communication about why and how the network is being used.

5. Avoid New System Fatigue: Most businesses have many systems for day-to- day tasks. Avoid launching an internal social network with other business systems simultaneously. It will be seen as another tool to navigate and learn. If it is not viewed as  'business critical' it will become low on the priority list.

6. List End-User Benefits: The biggest challenge when implementing is the perceived lack of business value in using the platform. For leadership teams, the potential to collect ideas, reach a company wide audience efficiently, and promote cross functional collaboration is compelling. For other employees the benefits are not as obvious for their role.

Developing a list of business benefits for internal end-users and reinforcing these regularly will foster usage. Similar to defining community motivations, the benefit list needs to by viewed from the end-user perspective. Otherwise employees will view it as the domain of leaders and managers.

Internal social networks - so much potential, so little usage. Putting community motivations at the forefront of implementation will drive usage. Acknowledging that external and internal social networking are uniquely different on-line behaviours anchors the purpose and objectives in the right context.

What are your thoughts on this?

What examples can you provide in increasing internal social network user adoption?