Anyone who has worked in marketing has worked for managers with a myriad of titles. It’s just a fact of the role. But, what do those titles really mean?
Marketing as a discipline has many definitions. For the sake of this discussion, I will define marketing as the ability to connect products and customers. [I used to employ a simpler definition – “to generate interest in something for sale.” But it was pointed out to me that definition was focused on my view, not the market view.] If marketing is done right, all parties will be happy, and the product will be accepted and purchased by the market
Simple and direct. Yes, of course there are so many other definitions that provide more details, make it more of a science, make it more of an art, and make it more complex. But, let’s focus on the simple definition.
If marketing as a business discipline is about connecting products and people, why do so many companies have a VP of Sales and Marketing? Sales is about the actual selling of the item. A salesperson (by whatever name he is called) is concerned about one thing, and one thing only. If any sales person disputes that, then they are not really in sales. What is their one concern? Simple – it’s about closing that deal today to put money in their pocket. Sales people are all about that one single deal, regardless of size (though they prefer the large ones obviously.) Marketing is about making that product and generating interest to the masses.
It’s a simple equation: Sales = n=1; Marketing = n=many
To be truly effective in marketing, you have to understand the larger market, not the single deal. Unless you’re doing 1-to-1 campaigns, which few companies can afford. The larger market you have targeted has a profile; it has characteristics that are more general. Yes, you need to understand who is in that market, and to what they respond; but, it’s not just about the single entity. So why then do so many companies put the two at-odd disciplines into one management structure? This creates an inherent conflict for not only resources, but direction. When a marketer is forced to ask the sales team for feedback about a campaign idea or strategy, it’s a single viewed response. The sales team thinks about how this will affect that one sale they are trying to close. They are not looking at the overall objective, and how the campaign will attract the interest of the larger market.
There have been some posts by Steve Johnson, Saeed and Adam Bullied about where the role of product management should fit in an organization. I think the problem stems from step before that discussion – that is, how you separate functions from the beginning. Companies that are looking at the management structure in a common combined way are missing the boat. Separate the functions. Let them each focus, through strong leadership, on what they are individually charged to attack.
Looking in from the outside it’s a simple fix really. Let sales sell. Let marketing generate the interest. Let product management find the market problems to solve. Let development find the solution to the problems. In other words, let people do their work.
Your last paragraph totally captures the essence of what the discussion has been about – hire great people, and trust them to do with work.
Of course, the one doing the hiring does need to understand where each of those functions belong, and why, and how to manage them. But that aside, it’s pretty cut and dry.
Great post!