Follow Us!

SEARCH
 
Issue Date: Daily Dog - March 6, 2008


What's Become of Integrated Marketing Communication?
By Mark Weiner, Author, "Unleashing the Power of PR: A Contrarian's Guide to Marketing and Communication"

This isn't the future I expected. I was sure that by now, the benefits of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) would be widely recognized and effectively practiced. When I first encountered IMC in 1993, it seemed reasonable to expect that, by now, organizational marketing and communications—advertising, trade, employee communications, PR, etc.—would be integrated and aligned for the optimal customer experience, manifesting itself in efficiency, effectiveness and return on investment. Unlike the often disjointed and discordant approaches of the past, I reasoned, new technologies and advanced methods for audience targeting would become united toward meeting the target's preferences for frequency, function and form of communication at the same time that it met the marketers' demands for a return–on–investment. As a result, marketing would flourish.

The belief in the benefits of IMC is as great as ever, even if the overwhelming majority of marketing organizations can't live up to its promise. The technology is even more advanced than what had been conceived even just five years ago. And marketing is under even greater pressure to do more with less and for less.

So in the past 15 years, why haven't marketing investment decision–makers demanded the advantages of IMC? Why hasn't it emerged to dominate the marketing landscape? Why is common practice—and even preferred practice—so distant from the theory?

Isolating the Challenge

Could it be that having been exposed to some of the realities of integrated marketing, executives now know that truly integrated marketing can only be derived from a truly integrated organization? A truly integrated organization understands that IT and engineering are as much a part of marketing as marketing is related to accounting or manufacturing because each is rooted in the customer experience. Genuinely aligning an organization extends beyond most marketers' sphere of influence and oversight. The unwillingness of the organization to become more fully integrated in its thoughts and actions can be an insurmountable obstacle.

Even those organizations claiming to deliver IMC are most commonly delivering integrated tactical outputs rather than an infrastructure aligned to deliver a positive, aligned customer experience. Most commonly, an organization's ambassadors are in silos, asked to assume a narrow, specific role. In many cases, these silos do not share priorities with one another and in some cases even compete and conflict with other departments. Add poor research, a lack of accountability, poor internal communication and it's surprising that any level of integration is ever achieved.

What's missing? Unified standards and metrics. Consistent analytics for assessing customer experience. Organizational collaboration and accountability for acquiring customers and keeping them happy.

Emerging Trend or Isolated Champion?

Recently, Dell announced a three–year, $4.5 billion partnership with WPP to create a new marketing model designed to further propel Dell's growth. The initiative is known as "Project DaVinci" because Dell is looking for the combination of artist and scientist—an agency that has both the creative horsepower and ability to measure the business impact of their work. The following citation, taken from the Dell announcement, places metrics, accountability and the customer experience at the center of the Dell/WPP/DaVinci initiative:

"…improving shareholder value is the ultimate award for all of us to win. Yes, we don't mind winning industry awards, but our customers and our shareholders are our focus, not what we can win in Cannes. A combination of great analytics and creative is key."

If any organization of size is likely to achieve the ideals of true ICM, it is Dell. It will be interesting to monitor their progress and to track the extent to which other large companies follow.

Conclusion

Until CEOs extend their expectations for accountability within marketing and communication and throughout the organization, integrated marketing will not take root and companies will suffer the consequences.

Public relations professionals are in a good position to lead the dialogue with their marketing and communications peers: The discussions alone will help to create a more integrated marketing communications environment and the outcomes from these conversations may lead to meaningful business results for now and into the future.

Mark Weiner has helped many of the world's most admired companies and brands to improve the return–on–investment of their public relations. He is the author of "Unleashing the Power of PR: A Contrarian's Guide to Marketing and Communication," published by John Wiley & Sons.

Comments:
Monday, March 10, 2008 10:29:51 AM by Bob Batchelor
Hi Mark,

Thanks for your insightful post. The organizational angle is one that I see holding back true integrated communications. Despite what seems logical and beneficial, too many leaders have walls built up that prevent true integration.

I also think that execs think "IMC" actually means "give my power up to someone else." A truly integrated function does not mean that one discipline marketing, PR, advertising, or some other hybrid becomes the leader/boss of the others. Rather, it means that the different groups combine efforts to support the CEO's objectives for the entire organization.

PR people I've talked to seem too scared to give up whatever power they have to "the marketers," which always is said with scorn and fear. Until these kinds of worries are overcome, I don't see IMC really working, though it is the most intelligent way to run communications.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:12:27 PM by Jason Karpf
This is one of the most insightful IMC commentaries I've read because it goes to the heart of corporate dysfunctionlack of integration across all business units, departments and divisions. We in marketing, PR and communications must remember that it's "not all about us" when we feel thwarted in achieving a united effort. Mark nails the problem by examining the entire organization.
Friday, June 06, 2008 3:40:50 PM by Tom Major
Could that have happened as a result of PR people given less power than they should be in the integration process? I might be wrong, but I reckon it's them responsible for maintaining internal communication in order to achieve true, productive integration at all levels within a company. It's hard to believe that people who are capable of proving 2+25 are unable to make CEOs give all of their power up to someone else (as Bob puts it) and leave them happy at that. I'm in a band, and I understand it very well that sometimes one has to give up his or her ambitions for the sake of common benefit. But allow PR guys to do their job - and you'll have it all!

Leave your comment
 
Daily 'Dog Reader Anonymous
 
Name 
Website 
Please note that comments are not automatically posted. The editors review all comments before posting, and they check the replies throughout the day. Please allow up to 2 hours for your comment to appear.
CAPTCHA Validation
Retype the code from the picture
CAPTCHA Code Image
Speak the code Change the code
 
PR Spotlight

BurrellesLuce's Johna Burke interviews Steve Mayerowitz, ABC Travel Producer, who discusses how social media has changed how broadcasters process inquiries and requests from PR people.


















Leading Edge
















PR University

Free White Paper Library
Read up on the latest ideas and technologies from top companies in the PR industry.
Click here to view the free white paper library




















Home | Contact Us | About Us | Privacy Policy | Advertise With Us

© 2010. Infocom Group. All Rights Reserved.