Mals Musings: Is the CMO DOA?
Can chief marketing officers (CMOs) really make marketing relevant again?
By on Jul 12, 2010Can chief marketing officers (CMOs) really make marketing relevant again?
Cometh the hour, cometh the savior. The position of chief marketing officer (CMO) is being touted as the role to re-energize and rejuvenate the marketing profession.
Despite marketings impressive rise to significance, it has struggled to claim equal billing with finance, manufacturing, or R&D. Can the CMO deliver on these huge expectations? The chances of success appear to be slim.
In recent years, many industriesfrom fast-moving consumer goods to pharmaceuticalshave appointed CMOs to reinvent and coordinate marketing. The challenge they are trying to overcome is the inefficiency and inconsistency that are inevitable effects of decentralization.
How effective is an organizations marketing when each business unit has its own marketing department?
Marketing is supposed to be about aligning the organization so that it effectively engages with its environment. So we know that a marketing department that doesnt meddle in other departments business is suboptimal.
Why we need CMOs
The quality of marketing professionals in pharma is poor.
When each business unit builds and manages its own marketing function, it leads to weaker marketing teams. The team is subjected to the leaders vision of marketing, often does not have the scope to specialize, and has limited opportunities to share and grow.
Each business unit develops and delivers its program in isolation, failing to take a broader organizational perspective. Unfortunately, programs reflect the business organization but do not reflect how customers are organized.
Branding and communication work only for products. It is difficult to build a strong, cohesive brand when communication is disparate and driven by different business units.
Even when there is a cross-unit communication function, it tends to build brands superficially.
What will CMOs deliver?
CMOs could help make marketing count in organizations. Customers will finally have a clear champion in the organization who ensures that the route to profit and growth is through customer satisfaction and loyalty.
It is almost impossible for marketing to fulfill its ambition of profitably meeting customer requirements without significant structural alignment. The notion of a slippery, expensive, and unaccountable marketing force is a recipe for extinction.
The CMO has a big, tough job to stop the downward trend of the marketing profession, but he or she can add value to the organization by improving the standard and the quality of marketing staff. Raising the standard, practicality, and relevance of the team will be a key milestone.
CMOs can also align the organization to the market, rather than the individual silo approaches that lead to confused brands. CMOs can drive and deliver the innovation that will bring the marketing profession into the 21st century and leverage that success across the organization.
Will it work?
The odds are stacked against CMOs.
If they are to be successful, diplomacy and compromise will be as useful as marketing expertise. In a battle between the center and the silos, the silos will often win. Delivering tangibles quickly can be difficult, since the organization is usually structured and incentivized to do the opposite.
The power lies in the business unit and any attempt at an aggressive takeover is usually doomed to fail. In the end, marketing depends on the rest of the organization to serve customers and beat the competition.
But marketing as a profession needs CMOs to be successful. Visionary marketing leaders are the key.
What these roles are called is irrelevant, but sooner rather than later we need to convincingly answer the question: What is marketing and what does the department do? I am not sure if CMOs are the answer, but I do know we need an answer soon.
For more of Mal's marketing musings, see 'Mind Marketings Rhetoric-Reality Gap!'.