MarketingProfs' Members Register for B2B Forum 2010 for just $695! (good until 11/30) »

Ask your question ... sign up today! It's FREE!
Student Questions     
 
This question has been closed, and points have been awarded.
Marketer Vs Strategist: Who Wins?
Posted By: mac504 on 3/2/2007 7:20 AM (CST) 125 Points
Even though Marketing and Strategy share common concepts and terminology each discipline view themselves as separate from the other.If you were a betting person who would you put your money on?A company led by a marketer or a company led by a strategist?

Kotler vs Porter?
Levitt vs Hamel?
etc

Posted by: wnelson Accepted Answer
3/2/2007 8:06 AM (CST)
First, your initial premise is flawed that Marketing and Strategy disciplines view themselves separate. This just isn't true. To be a good marketer, you have to know and practice strategy and to be a good strategist, you have to know and practice marketing. In the second case, asking which will win is a little like saying the right side of your body is different from the left side. If you could only have half, which would be better? Guess what? If you have just half your body, you die! Same with a company. If you just have strategy without marketing, you die because you have no tools to make money today. You flounder around in a dreamland that will never come true. If you have just marketing and no strategy, you wonder aimlessly from day to day with no direction and end up like - "Frosty the Snowman" - where when it snows, you put the hat on it's "Happy Birthday" and he's alive again, but ever spring, Frosty ends up as water vapor.

Reread the books by the masters you mentioned. I believe you will find sections in Kotler's books on strategy. Levitt has the whole product model - that's strategy. Porter discusses issues on marketing. You can't separate the two topics and hope to be successful.

I hope this helps.

Wayde
 
Posted by: mac504 Author Response
3/2/2007 8:35 AM (CST)
Yea but they still view themselves as different disciplines with their own theories and academic journals.

Jack Trout once mentioned that Michael Porter refered to himself as a strategist and Trout as a marketer.
 
Posted by: wnelson Accepted Answer
3/2/2007 10:02 AM (CST)
That's an academic distinction and doesn't exist and isn't practical in the real world. You can't have one without the other. In academia, you study disciplines separately so you understand the principles. In a real company, the disciplines are combined and can't be separated or the company fails.

Wayde
 
Posted by: W.M.M.A. Member Response
3/2/2007 10:00 PM (CST)
The winner is the one who knows the difference between theory and practical application.
 
Posted by: KathySmithFilms* Accepted Answer
3/3/2007 3:49 PM (CST)
Hi mac504,

You have received correct advise from experts both having a background the rest of us still dream about to attain. So you
have a brilliant strat plan. If you can't execute it into reality
then its just a brilliant piece of writing on paper.

The tools for running an organization are not in just one
volume of works by one author. There are many with
tools that help on marketing. Its good to differentiate
as you are building your product/service lines using the
correct technology as you need it.
Kathy
 
Posted by: kevin.horne Accepted Answer
3/4/2007 12:27 PM (CST)
As a strategist working in the marketing domain, I'd have to agree thru experience that the two disciplines, while having significant overlap, are different. And not just academically.

The two biggest gripes against marketing are (a) not business-outcome-focused enough and (b) lacking in quantifiable metrics to base or prove performance. A strategist eats (a) and (b) for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. And so, to your question of "putting money on" [which seemed to be misinterpreted as choosing one OR the other], I'll go with a strategist leading the marketer vs. the other way round any time.

Check the profiles of the top CEOs - how many are ex-McKinsey and how many are marketers?
 
Posted by: W.M.M.A. Accepted Answer
3/4/2007 12:52 PM (CST)
CocaCola USA CEO...."marketer"
But, Kevin....don't you overlap as "Marketing Strategist"
Isn't it the same thing to be a marketer/strategist.
If one is accomplishing marketing properly...correctly...being a "strategist" is the major component.
You say Potato.....etc.

Randall
WMMA
 
Posted by: wnelson Accepted Answer
3/4/2007 1:04 PM (CST)
I would say to Kevin's observations of the marketers who don't have both business outcome focus and quantifiable metrics are marketers not fully schooled and versed in the science and craft of marketing. I have seen this too, unfortunately. But, there are tons and tons of marketing literature around today that cover marketing bench marketing and dashboards. ISO9001 required business metrics on every function in the organization. It's taught in marketing programs in universities. I would say these incomplete marketers are creative people - like artists and language experts - who believe that a clever turn of phrase and a cute picture is marketing. This is a valuable part of marketing - one that I admire highly, but none-the-less incomplete in today's world and I would not call this "marketing." Rather - these are marketing activities - like graphics arts and writing. There is no use in business for any discipline that does not have metrics or a business focus - much less marketing.

I have seen many people who are called "marketing" and are incomplete like this. These folks muddy the discipline, drag down the value, and confuse people concerning the real discipline of marketing. And they do a disservice to their employers. This is why you see a few inputs a week on here from someone who writes, "I just graduated from school and landed a Director of Marketing job. I've never done marketing before - what do I do now?" Come on...a Director? You won't find a director of engineering who hasn't practiced engineering. How about finance? Know any directors of finance who aren't familiar with finance?

A marketer has to know strategy, geared toward business outcomes, and measure results. The marketer has to know a little about the technology he's marketing, too. A strategist has to know business, technology, marketing, and business outcomes, and how to measure to be successful, too. The disciplines aren't effective if they aren't well overlapped.

As for CEO's - many are engineers or finance people, too. None went to school to learn "strategy." What they are is very effective leaders who can hire great folks, listen to them, and lead them based on a vision that is honed by evaluating market and strategy, finance, engineering, etc.

I'll get off my soapbox now....

Wayde
 
Posted by: W.M.M.A. Accepted Answer
3/4/2007 11:03 PM (CST)
I would hope that the author of this post does not abandon it. I know, after speaking with others, this post (the original) has some merit. The responses have (sans my own, of course) been well-stated.

mac, before you close this, could you please take it forward a bit more? Your responses, since it is your post, are awaited by more than just me.

Randall
WMMA
 
Posted by: mac504 Author Response
3/5/2007 7:48 AM (CST)
Even as a student I agree that the 2 disciplines SHOULD be thought of as one and the same but in most cases they are not.It's possible to learn 'marketing' without learning 'strategy' and it's also possible to learn 'strategy' without learning 'marketing'.

Marketing people are stereotyped as 'communications specialists' who manage 'brands' and 'serve customer's needs at a profit'.They are also thought of as 'tactical' with no consideration with how other parts of the business contributes.Also 'competitive strategy' operates at the 'brand' and 'communications' level.

Strategy people are thought to be holistic business strategists and businessmen.They see the WHOLE business and how each function affects the other.They see 'competitive advantage' as product offerings,business models and seek advantage from operations,finance,marketing,legal and acquisitional advantages.They also understand cash flow and financial concerns of a business.They focus on the top AND bottom line whereas marketers just focus on the top line.

Go to any top business school website or top business consultancy company and you'll see the segregation.
 
Posted by: ethnicomm Accepted Answer
3/5/2007 12:34 PM (CST)
I am an MBA (finance/marketing) and aside from consulting, I teach marketing in two different departments at the college level. This sounds like an essay question ;)

I have to agree that it's possible to learn one without the other. Then again, it is possible to learn anthropology without statistics. However, if one wants to be successful and apply the knowledge...

Where are you getting your information from? Even 1st year marketing textbooks relate marketing to strategy. In fact, many are called "strategic marketing".

Good marketers see the big picture as well. Since marketing is typically the communication hub in a company, they need to know what's happening around them. Often initiatives arise from the R&D, engineering or even customer service departments - marketing works with or touches all areas within a company.

As far as marketers focusing on the top line, ask any marketer who has had his/her budget reduced not because sales are down but because the sales mix has resulted in lower bottom line margins :) Marketers need to understand finance in order to create a budget, manage the budget, make strategic decisions on funds allocations, evaluate various marketing programs and unanticipated opportunities, do post-mortems on marketing program etc... Calculations like Net Marketing Contribution actually dig into the financials so that the bean counters don't just look at the top line and bottom line. Marketers use metrics that are considered leading indicators of future problems or opportunities. Even measuring things like customer satisfaction indices and customer retention costs help the marketer to determine where to allocate funds.

I haven't commented on the strategy side per se as it is tied to marketing.

Hope this helps.

ethnicomm inc.
 
Posted by: wnelson Accepted Answer
3/5/2007 1:51 PM (CST)
If you are asking "which will win, a complete, well rounded strategist versus a limited marketing communications professional" - well, then you have answered your own question. Of course a well rounded strategist will win. The point is that a marketing communications person is a piece of marketing, not a marketing professional. This is like asking who will be more successful in selling novels - someone who knows how to sharpen pencils or someone who knows how to write? However, a pure strategist - no other background but strategy, just as a pure marketer doesn't exist in the real world. And a marketer who doesn't have a grasp of the business or measurements or strategy is not a marketer. The AMA defines marketing as: "Marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating, and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders." That sounds like more than communications and branding, doesn't it?

Wayde
 
Posted by: mac504 Author Response
3/5/2007 2:51 PM (CST)
Well answer this for me.When I graduate and get a job as a 'marketer' will I:

1)Have any say on how to allocate internal resources for my company?

2)Have any real control over finance,manufacturing,operations,engineering,and legal departments?

3)Will the 'Sales' people really have to follow my lead?I mean will 'sales' really be a subsection of marketing like I was taught in my textbooks?

4)Have any real say on what market opportunities to pursue?

5)Have any real authority on competitive strategy?Will I be able to propose a radical new business model thats totally out of the box?

6)Propose strategies for the short and long term financial health of my company?


Do marketers really do these things in real companies or are do the corporate strategists determine these things?I'm not trying to be a smart ass I really would like to know.
 
Posted by: mac504 Author Response
3/5/2007 3:26 PM (CST)
I found this article tell me what you think about it.


http://www.blonnet.com/catalyst/2004/12/30/stories/2004123000090200.htm
 
Posted by: W.M.M.A. Member Response
3/5/2007 5:53 PM (CST)
What do you believe this article proves? I say it proves Nothing! Well, nothing but someone else has another opinion. Listen mac you won't get the finality you are seeking with this question...just points of view.

You will be the arbiter of your side.

Randall
WMMA
 
Posted by: wnelson Accepted Answer
3/5/2007 7:04 PM (CST)
I started off saying that pure strategy without marketing is as useless as pure marketing without strategy. They both contain elements of each. The question of "who will win" is not a real world question. You need both. The article states you need both.

As far as your questions, as marketer for a large company:

1) I had the top say on how to allocate internal resources for my company - engineering and manufacturing for personnel and capacity.

2) I didn't have REAL control over real control over finance, manufacturing,operations, engineering, and legal departments. I was not a CEO or General Manager. I was a marketer. You cannot expect to have all of these functions report to you unless you are the CEO. But that doesn't mean the CEO was a strategist. The strategy was set by the marketers - to his guidelines. In fact, the strategic process (see this on my website) was a team effort by all organizations. Marketing took the lead because it was looking at the future markets and customer needs.

3) Sales people really did to follow my lead. I set their direction in terms of products to sell to whom. I also provided them with collateral material and trained them. Sales IS NOT really a subsection of marketing. It's sales. It's a separate function on it's own. Sales people manage accounts one at a time, marketing manages the strategy as to what kind of accounts sales should go after given the products/services/competition, etc.

4) I had real say on what market opportunities to pursue - absolutely.

5) I had real authority on competitive strategy. I proposed a radical new business model that were totally out of the box.

What you can expect in a position out of school is to start at the bottom of the ladder and earn your stripes into a position of authority like this. You won't be made the Director of Marketing on your first day. If you work in a company that has a strategic department as well as a marketing department, you won't be made the guy to sets the company's total strategy first day either. You have to earn that through experience and showing you know your craft better than anyone else in the company. I wouldn't look to be made CEO on day one either. You can expect to do some "grunt work" to demonstrate you have capabilities to move up and have authority and larger responsibility.

Wayde
 
Posted by: ethnicomm Accepted Answer
3/6/2007 10:21 PM (CST)
1)Have any say on how to allocate internal resources for my company?

Yes, if you're astute enough to understand the big picture and how all the pieces work together, you will be able to help senior management make the right decisions on resource allocation. See last week's BusinessWeek article by Jack Welch - he touches on this in a different way.

2)Have any real control over finance,manufacturing,operations,engineering,and legal departments?

When you say control, do you mean that your programs wil influence the work that these departments do? If so, YES.

3)Will the 'Sales' people really have to follow my lead?I mean will 'sales' really be a subsection of marketing like I was taught in my textbooks?

NO - no one will follow your lead until you prove that you are worth following. Marketing is "strategy", sales is "execution".

4)Have any real say on what market opportunities to pursue?

Absolutely. You should be the expert in your category or field and know where the best strategic opportunities lie.

5)Have any real authority on competitive strategy?Will I be able to propose a radical new business model thats totally out of the box?

Given that you are supposed to know what's happening in the marketplace and what the articulated and unarticulated needs of the consumer are, I would suggest that you are the person best suited to propose out of the box or innovative ideas for your company.


6)Propose strategies for the short and long term financial health of my company?

Your pricing strategy will directly impact the short and long term financial health of the company. Your recommendations on what products/services to offer, what distribution channels to employ, what after-sales service structure to develop etc will affect the long term financial health of the company.

Do marketers really do these things in real companies or are do the corporate strategists determine these things?I'm not trying to be a smart ass I really would like to know.

Real things in real companies...really :)

I've worked in retail, in tier-one CPG and for an international company - opportunities to drive a business are there, you just have to have the confidence and desire to go for it. No one will support or promote a cynic.
 
Posted by: mac504 Author Response
3/11/2007 12:38 AM (CST)
Thanks for your responses
 


Get more answers ... ReTweet this!

Would you like to post a response?
Welcome to Know-How Exchange!
This is a collaborative community. We welcome everyone's participation.
All you need to do is login. Enter your account info in the box above (top right).
Not a member? Not a problem. Register here (it's FREE and EASY).




Know-How Exchange powered by MarketingProfs


Sponsored Links

Buy a Link Now

Just Released ... Download Today!
Just Released ... Download Today!
Look inside
Included with Premium Membership
User Name:
Password:
Remember Me
Forgot your password?

Top 25 KHE Experts
(Student Questions)
W.M.M.A. (28840)
Carl Crawford (22363)
wnelson (20398)
Puru Gupta (19298)
Peter (henna gaijin) (18747)
mgoodman (15744)
Jay Hamilton-Roth (13995)
thinkmor (10987)
ASVP/ChrisB (10031)
Gary Bloomer (9758)
mbarber (9061)
Pepper Blue (8859)
SRyan ;] (8165)
Sanjeev Kumar Vyas (7310)
stevea (6301)
jose04 (5994)
NoStressXpress (5284)
bennydunreallycare (5043)
michael (5010)
bobhogg (4824)
MANSING (4819)
Michele (4712)
SteveByrneBranding (4652)
sham (4488)
telemoxie (4315)
Recently Posted Marketing Jobs
Director of Marketing and Communications
Demand Generation Manager
Marketing/Advertising Faculty
Director of Marketing
Market Analyst
Sr. Field Marketing Manager - Business Intell.
Associate Vice President of Marketing and Corporat
Marketing Manager
[more jobs]

Join over 355,000 members ... SIGN UP!

My email address is and I'd like my password to be .

Already a member? Sign In!

My email address is , and my password is .


HACKER SAFE certified sites prevent over 99.9% of hacker crime.