BNET Insight

Sales Machine

A, Always. B, Be. C, Closing.

Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

September 24th, 2009 @ 11:30 am

27 Comments

Categories: Ethics, Marketing, Rant, Watercooler

Tags: Marketing Group, Sales Strategy, Marketing Research, Sales, Marketing, Geoffrey James

Last week’s post “Top 10 Reasons Sales Hates Marketing” documented the complaints that I’ve heard from sales reps about their marketing groups.  As I expected, I got some email flak complaining that I wasn’t being fair to marketing. Here’s a typical comment:

All of it, really. The existence of this entire series of nit-picking, to me, is more indicative of a poorly run sales/marketing operation than it is a useful exchange of feedback. It’s nothing but pointing fingers with baseless accusations and generalizations.

Well, I hear you, but I disagree.   It’s not nit-picking to defend sales groups against the encroachments of marketing.

The conflicts between Sales and Marketing are not a conflict between equals.  In most cases, the source of the conflict is that the group the creates the revenue (i.e. Sales) is trying to remain productive and profitable. And sometimes the only way to do this is to downsize, disempower or downright ignore the marketing group.

Sales teams that don’t sell put companies out of business.  And sales reps that can’t sell lose their jobs, usually quite quickly.  That FORCES both sales teams and sales reps to perform, a motivation that’s generally lacking inside marketing groups.

Furthermore, there’s plenty of objective evidence that marketing groups, in general, aren’t doing a very good job.  According to CSO Insights, on average, marketing groups generate less than one third of the usable sales leads.  And according to IDC, around 90% of the collateral materials produced by marketing groups never get used by a sales team.

Considering that many marketing groups command hefty budgets, that’s not much positive impact.  But it is a lot of wasted resources.

Of course, there are some marketing groups that really do generate leads and come up with useful sales tools.  In fact, every day I run into more marketers who “get it.”  They’ve figured out that marketing is a TACTICAL function whose sole purpose is to help the sales team to sell.

But a lot of marketing groups - the traditional guys with their unmeasured ads, pie-in-the-sky strategies, dumb-as-dirt product designs, and jerry-rigged faked-up market research - they’re just a waste of office space.

Frankly, I blame the business schools.  For the past three decades, they’ve focused on Marketing as the be-all and end-all of dealing with customers.  You have academic pinheads saying that marketing should replace sales (yeah, right!) with very few dissenting voices.

Hundreds of these business schools have thousands of marketing courses.  But most of those schools COMPLETELY IGNORE sales.  They don’t teach it.  They don’t even talk about it, except as some kind of automatic process that’s a tactical element of marketing.  Dumb, dumb, dumb!

I realize that I’ve ranted about this before, but hardly a day goes by that I don’t see yet another example of some marketing group wasting money — and thereby screwing investors — with traditional, unmeasurable, by-the-book B-school-style marketing.

There comes a time when we have to stop talking about “aligning sales and marketing” and start talking about firing marketing groups that aren’t willing to get on board with what’s happening in today’s sales-driven business world.

That’s what I think, anyway.  You’re free to disagree, of course.

This Blog's Best Post: The Ultimate Cold Calling Tool

 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    zondre

    09/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Aloha Geoffrey,
    I read your post "The top 10 reasons sales hates marketing" and accepted that it contained valid arguments. And, I agree with you that there are many marketing professionals out there, who may have barely graduated, because they weren't paying close attention in class and now run these departments poorly. However, I am always dissapointed when people create a straw man argument that contains truth, but then makes a generalized conclusion, which doesn't hold true. The dissapointment is compounded when the blame is placed on business schools.

    This is what I learned in business school:
    According the American Marketing Association "Marketing 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". I believe that defenition has been recently updated. But, we all learn that sales is a part of that function. They aren't seperate processes.

    A company uses marketing to identify the products or services that a customer wants and is willing to pay for that the company can provide at a profit. For example, it wouldn't make much sense for a company to keep pushing sales people to sell type writers, when it was clear that businesses wanted and could afford computers. Sure there were other markets and uses for type writers. But, if the company said "marketing be dammed we need to hire better sales people or ride them harder", when it was clear that the market was shrinking, the company would go out of business. On the other hand, if a company develops the greatest product since sliced bread, but they never tell people about it (via advertising or direct sales) the marketing process is broken and a waste. It's all part of the same system.

    Please don't blame all business school graduates, because some people were not able to learn and interpret what they were told in class.

  •  
    2

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Note 1:
    First, thanks for the very thoughtful note. You showed the kind of restraint that I sometimes find difficult. I'm all the more impressed because I think I was maybe in bad mood when I posted this one.

    Anyway, the problem with business school definitions of marketing is that they tend to be grandiose. The one you've provided is no exception, although its better than many that I seen.

    Sales is not a part of the marketing function. Sales is the only reason for a company to exist. If sales don't take place somewhere, you don't have a company. Heck, you don't even have a non-profit without sales.

    THEREFORE, every -- and I mean every -- organization inside a company is a service organization whose mandate is to help sales to sell. Market is no exception. Marketing is a service function to sales. The purpose of marketing is to make the sales happen more quickly and cheaply, primarily through lead generation.

    The "strategic" function of marketing is really just BS.

  •  
    3

    jeffcallen

    09/24/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    I've been on various sides of this idea for a while, having
    worked in ad agencies and marketing firms, as well as
    having to sell myself, and having good friends who are
    salespeople....

    I'd be curious to see a list of 10 things marketers hate about
    salespeople.... it might begin with....

    1. They think they're the masters of the universe
    2. sometimes they call us "the clowns in marketing" before
    we even present an idea.... maybe PTSD from previous
    experiences, but willingness to start fresh sometimes isn't
    there....
    3. they promise "whatever the client wants"... (maybe
    really frustrating customer service/engineering staff), rather
    than trying to move the client towards whatever the future
    of the company depends on.
    4. short term thinking
    5. short term thinking
    6. short term thinking

    ...etc...

  •  
    4

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 3:
    1. They are.
    2. You are.
    3. This is true, but silly. The problem isn't that sales is promising what the client wants but that the company's future is dependent upon something that the client doesn't want. Hence the "clowns" opinion.
    4. Short term, but correct, thinking is better than long term foolish thinking, which is what generally occurs when marketing pretends it is "strategic."

  •  
    5

    Retro Rob

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    If marketing is not strategic who in your organizations is responsible for identifying a typical profitable customer profile sometimes referred to as "Personas?" Without this info it is very difficult to determine your correct target market and without a correct target market how does sales know who they should be talking to, especially if it is a new market?

  •  
    6

    Larraineboyd@...

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Often it's not just the marketing department who doesn't like the sales team, but all departments feeling that way. There is nothing surprising about that because it's always been that way. Sales people have a lot of freedom and they should always be the positive ones appearing to love their career. It's unfortunate human nature that many people carry weights of personal burdens and then point the finger to others they feel aren't appreciative of them or appear to have undeservingly more than them. Usually in the case of sales vs. marketing, it's because people aren't taking the time to look at how both departments are critical to each other for success.

    We at Clear Channel Outdoor in Columbus are VERY blessed to have Marlo as our Marketing Go-To person. She is amazing! I praise her every chance I get and often take her to lunch to discuss client strategies. What has really helped her to help me, as an example, is to periodically go to the client meeting with me. She gets the full credit for all of her ideas, gets to see my enthusiastic presentation of her work, and watches the clients respond to understand what happens after that in the sometimes difficult negotiation phase. Sharing in this way has made us an effective team.

    Marlo really cares and leaps into any projects I ask of her. The loyalty and appreciation factors make her perform at peak performance. In her case, her salary is not paying for lousy marketing. If anything, she deserves a raise! I would recommend that people work on improved relationships within the departments and that will make everything better!

    Sincerely, Larraine Boyd - Account Executive/Sales

  •  
    7

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 5:
    Marketing's correct job is lead generation. In most cases, however, the target market (and most likely buyer) spills out of the sales process, assuming it's reasonably focused to start with. (I.e. don't try to sell mainframes to consumers.)

    The problem with your thinking is that you've assumed that sales doesn't know what type of customer they should be selling to and therefore need some kind of direction. In fact, most sales reps can tell you exactly what kind of person is likely to buy, based upon their experience and their ability to sell. Marketing's job is to find more of these, not to tell them to sell to some theoretical "persona."

  •  
    8

    Larraineboyd@...

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Marketing's job is WAY more than lead generation. It's short sighted to think otherwise. I suppose that your comments will help generate more blogs from others, which is the purpose of having a blog.

    As you have assumed that I as a sales person don't know what type of customer I should be selling to, is just as you say...an assumption. I'll not defend myself on that as it is unworthy of comment.

    Surely, I am not alone in believing that sales people know who to call on. My marketing person not only send us leads (which is apparently all your marketing people do or are supposed to do) but she also gathers valuable information, creates great one sheets, shares what other markets are doing, and supports all of our team with instant professional material that we can take with us to help sell our clients. Her information helps us to build the relationships with our prospects/clients and shows that we care beyond just selling out product. People who sell need to have such information at their fingertips so they have more time to actually sell.

    My comments were to promote positive relationships between business departments for overall better performances so no one is paying for lousy marketing. If anyone is paying for lousy marketing within their organization, then perhaps the repore is poor and the direction isn't clear of what is expecdted. Those things could translate into that end result.

    I choose not to lock any one department into a position of doing one thing or another...such as sending out leads. If that was all marketing did, they could hand you a phone book and then go home for the day. Perhaps marketing people have different duties around the country so you could be correct that all they do is find lead generation. I'm just glad that I already know how to prospect appropriately and have someone here who can offer services/research/knowledge to me to present to support reasons our product is one they should use.

    Possibly positive comments returned don't make people respond to blogs to keep the conversation going, but whatever ~ I enjoy the BNET and I for one just wanted to pass along something that worked for me and was positive. I must get back to work now....I have sales to make. Thank you. Larraine

  •  
    9

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 8:
    Perhaps I should have clarified what I meant by "lead generation." I don't mean undifferentiated "leads" as in lists. I mean leads that have a very high likelihood of closing.

    Overall, marketing is a service function for sales, whose main purpose is to sales happen more quickly and more easily. The primary sphere where they can accomplish this is in lead generation. All demand creation, for example, is pointless unless it generates lead. Ditto for every other marketing activity.

    The emphasis on lead generation is important because once a prospect becomes a customer, the relationship belongs almost entirely to the sales team, and marketing has very little (if any) value to add.

    The relationship has some value to add to marketing, though, if marketing is willing to listen to sales, when the sales reps explain how they secured that account. Marketing can then take that information and find more leads that match that profile.

    Unfortunately, many marketing groups (not yours, apparently and thankfullly) have some grandiose notion that they're "strategic" and try to own not just the customer relationship, but also try to control other areas of the company (like product development) where they not only fail to add value, but actually make things much more difficult for the people actually tasked to get those jobs done.

    Think of it this way: sales and engineering are completely different disciplines that attract completely different personality types, which completely different background. The ONE thing that they agree upon is that there are "clowns in marketing" as one comment above it.

    Rather than complaining about a lack of respect, marketing groups need to do some self assessment to figure out why the two most important groups in the company aren't taking marketing seriously.

  •  
    10

    rmorrisiped

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Obviously this is a practical and necessary conversation ... not just a theoretical discussion. The lack of effective interaction between marketing and sales resources is not new, it is not insignificant, and it is not sustainable. Either a business learns the answer to bridging this gap, or the business ultimately fails. In that spirit, consider the concept that "marketing" is a broader concept than just lead generation. Lead generation is a marketing function, and it's perfectly legitimate to critique the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of that function.

    But to suggest that lead generation is the only purpose of marketing is not only short sighted, it demonstrates a comical lack of understanding of the actual process of building and operating a successful business. A business without a sales function can't exist, but a business with only a sales function is destined to last only as long as its current products are interesting to customers. (Hmmm ... I wonder how those products came to be in the first place?) A business is not just a group of service departments that exist to make the sales job easier. It is an organization that exists to address a challenge a customer is willing to pay money to address. First it must identify a customer ... then it must understand the customer's needs ... then it must build something that meets the customer's needs in a way the customer will pay for ... then it must make the customer aware of that thing ... convince the customer to buy that thing ... deliver that thing ... support the customer, etc.

    In very plain language, if any one of those functions fails, the business fails. Sales people can only sell when they have a product that matters to a customer, the ability to connect with customers, and the resources to deliver effectively.

    Think of it this way: How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the product simply isn't good enough? Apparently there's a gap between sales and R&D or manufacturing. How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the product is simply too expensive relative to the competition? Apparently there's a gap between sales and finance. How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the business has a bad reputation for failing to deliver well for customers? Apparently there's a gap between sales and service.

    The point is this: a business exists to generate profitable revenue through the activity of doing something a customer is willing to pay for. Sales is critical to this purpose. Sales cannot possibly, even logically succeed without the other functions of a business. The problem is not a gap between sales and marketing. The problem is people in ANY business function who think of their function separately from the other interdependent functions that make the business operate altogether. Many gaps exist; any gap is deadly.

    Believe me, Geoffrey, I understand your frustration and would never condone the pointless ivory tower thinking that is so often passed off as marketing. And I'm not just a business school apologist, because I think there are significant problems with the curriculum -- of which sales / marketing is just one. But to abandon the principles of research and product development and positioning and promotion is beyond foolish. It's literally laughable.

    Rather than ranting about what isn't done well, perhaps consider a way to fix the challenge. Here's an isolated suggestion that only addresses a piece of the issue, but at least starts the process going in the right direction: hold the entire set of resources in the go-to-market function accountable for the same set of metrics: profitable revenue. Not just revenue ... profitable revenue. Don't pay sales reps for revenue, pay them for margin. Don't pay marketing people for leads, pay them for margin. Don't pay product people for any activity other than margin.

    Ahhh ... but there's the rub: no one, least of all sales people, can be held accountable for margin in a vacuum. Or are you suggesting that sales reps could generate higher margins and stop giving steep discounts simply by changing their minds?

    You make a truly valid point, Geoffrey. Most marketing is pointless and not attached to profit. But you undermine the impact and credibility of that point by insisting on a single answer to a complex problem. Open your mind, Geoffrey. Consider the concept called "business" rather than just "sales."

  •  
    11

    jeffcallen

    09/25/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    RE #4 (smackdown eh?)

    1 and 2 can be a bad feedback loop... i.e. a smart and
    successful master of the universe salesperson is gracious,
    but if he/she rubs his/her ego in everyone else's faces too
    much, the good marketing staff will quit, and,uh, then you
    may get the bad marketing staff salespeople lament so
    much.... or the CEO hires a bunch of recent MBA's and you
    get a powerpoint mess...

    i.e. self fulfilling prophecy.... just who's on top testerone-
    ismo from a David Mamet film....

    (but, the other side... Yes, I've worked with GREAT
    salespeople who would take everyone else out to lunch on
    their commission checks, THEY got great marketing....they
    were consumate salespeople who sold to EVERYONE in the
    company itself, not just customers)

    2. The "whatever the customer wants" and "short term
    thinking" can also be a bad loop, and/or a lack of
    direction.... i.e. B2B Client has budget for 2 wheel drive car
    but wants features of 4 wheel drive car so salesperson
    promises 3 wheel drive car as a deal and shows it to
    engineering who groan in agony.... this happens because
    we're chasing the wrong customers or we need to radically
    innovate... or maybe we just have salespeople who think
    like order takers...

    Marketing could do more PR than the current "whizz-bang
    random creative ideas." A salesperson will have at least
    slightly easier cold calls, as people have heard of your
    products, your rep is good, and there are at least a few less
    emotional objections due to a lack of known image....

  •  
    12

    Ancient_One

    09/26/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    A statement seems to keep cropping-up in the business literature:

    Sales is the only reason for a company to exist.

    Isn't a valid contract defined to include benefit to both (all) parties of the transaction? Without a product or service with some value, how can a sales contract be legally valid? The extreme case of selling non-existent products or services is obviously fraud.

    If sales wishes to sell the potential for having a custom or semi-custom product/service, a marketing team is not required for interface with development and senior management. Marketing can help determine potential wider markets and related products. Would you care to comment on the probabilities that marketing interpretations on research data may reflect organizational politics more than dispassionate research?

  •  
    13

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/26/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 12:
    Would you care to comment on the probabilities that marketing interpretations on research data may reflect organizational politics more than dispassionate research?

    Yes. Here goes: It usually does.

  •  
    14

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/26/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 10:
    Quote: How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the product simply isn't good enough? Apparently there's a gap between sales and R&D or manufacturing. How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the product is simply too expensive relative to the competition? Apparently there's a gap between sales and finance. How many times have sales people complained they aren't able to win deals because the business has a bad reputation for failing to deliver well for customers? Apparently there's a gap between sales and service.

    Gap? Gap?! That term emasculates the diagnosis. It implies (as marketeers always do) that both parties are at fault and that they need to "work closer together" to solve the problem.

    Horsefeathers.

    Every organization in the corporation exists purely to serve the needs of the sales team, because if sales don't take place, the business ceases to exist. If the customer service group isn't performing, it isn't a freakin' "gap" -- it's a customer service group that can't do its job. Same thing with engineering. There's no "gap." There are products that customers want/need and products that they don't. When engineers fail to build the former and instead build the latter, there's not a "gap". There's a bunch of engineers who aren't listening to sales and SHOULD BE FIRED FOR FAILING TO DO SO.

    I don't know how much more clear I can make this. The best market research consists of asking the sales team what's selling and why, and what kind of things customers are asking for. And then the rest of the company scurries off and builds those products and then supports them.

    Instead, what happens in most companies is that the marketing group pays some analysts (e.g. intellectual ******) to run some bogus market research that confirms whatever stupid fad the marketers think is going to be hot. Then the marketers trot out hockey-stick projections that will never pan out and start interfering with sales, trying to get them to sell "strategic" products that customers don't want but which "scored well with the focus group."

    Insane!

  •  
    15

    MrQuattro

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Well this is all a bit childish isn?t it; there?s quite a lot of finger pointing going on here.

    Marketing is NOT there to service Sales any more than R&D (say) is there to provide a service to Sales ? after all, they design the products that Sales ultimately pitch to the customer. Marketing and Sales are there to execute quite different functions within the company, each contributing ? TO THE ORGANISATION. It?s a bit introspective of Sales to assume that Marketing is, or indeed should be, a subset of the sales function.

    I?ve worked in high tech marketing (specifically marketing communications) for the last twenty years and without exception, this myth that Marketing is there to provide sales leads to Sales is perpetuated by those who don?t understand the role. One of the functions of marketing communications, depending on the product & market can be sales lead generation ? but there is a big difference between selling double glazing to a consumer and helping a mobile phone design engineer understand the benefits of silicon chip. In the latter case the marketing objective is never to ?generate sales leads?. Sales, in this context, is the function that provides the bridge between vendor and buyer; it?s a two way communications channel to facilitate the relationship. Marketing builds the relationship ecosystem within which all communications take place. It establishes a position within the target market that creates the relationship in the first place ? credibility, reputation, trust, synchronicity ? all these frankly difficult to quantify intangibles that are an integral part of a successful organisation. Without Marketing it would be naive in the extreme to assume that Sales could simply walk into the customer and ?just sell product? ? customer/seller relationships simply do not work like that.

    Sales, superficially, has a sense of righteousness compared to Marketing because their deliverables are more closely linked to revenue, and in many ways more measurable on the bottom line. Going back to the previous group, R&D, they are clearly a cost centre with zero revenue generation potential. Are they too (and every other element in the organisation) to be considered somehow subservient to the omnipotent Sales department? Of course not, this superiority complex is an artificial construct that works well in a blog but has no foundation in the real world.

  •  
    16

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 15:
    Quote: Marketing and Sales are there to execute quite different functions within the company, each contributing TO THE ORGANISATION.

    Oh, I see. The purpose of every segment of a corporation is to serve the organization. And here I thought the purpose of a corporation was to make money. How could I have been so wrong?

    Seriously, you have the strangest idea of what business is all about that I've ever encountered. Sarcasm aside, of course the R&D group exists ENTIRELY to serve the needs of the sales group, because if they don't make products that are sold, they're just wasting time and money.

    Every group, including the executive team, exist purely to generate sales and are therefore in service to the sales group. Or should be. It's called Capitalism. Read up on it.

  •  
    17

    sbroumand

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Geoffrey,

    Great series on the tuggle between sales and marketing, couldn't agree more from a General Manager's perspective. If Marketing understands its core value is a tactical role supporting the sales strategy then you can achieve some significant results.

    Cheers,

    SEB

  •  
    18

    Retro Rob

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    While I enjoy your column it seems no matter what any marketing professional says you have an answer. It would appear any company would be blessed to have such a messiah in their sales department because all they would need is you - the swiss army knife of sales.

  •  
    19

    Retro Rob

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Feel free to use the tag line I just gave you - no charge - its what marketers do.

  •  
    20

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 18-19:
    In fact, I worked for 6 years in marketing for a Fortune 100 corporation, where I controlled a multi-million dollar market research budget, helped launch several product brands, and won several marketing awards. I became increasingly miserable in the job because it was clear to me that we were doing NOTHING WHATSOEVER to help that company make money.

    Since then, I've been a freelance journalist who's interviewed hundreds of marketing executives and written dozens of feature articles on corporate strategy for some pretty major business magazines. I'm not a sales guy who's carping at marketing -- I'm a more of a marketing guy who figured out that the sales group was right all along.

    In any case, the reason that it's easy to counter any arguments put forward by marketeers is that a marketeer should only be saying one thing. And that is: "Here's a fully qualified lead; thank you for following up to the last one I gave you."

  •  
    21

    missas

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    I find myelf getting yelled at a lot by sales people in my company. I've had my creativity, my professional experience, and my integrity demeaned.

    These discussions on the relationship between sales and marketing, and the theoretical purpose of sales vs marketing is all very nice. A bit like arguing the bible. Fun, but not generally productive.

    Yes I was insulted by your article. You warned me, but I take a lot of pride in my work and in my efforts to support sales, so I forged ahead thinking I was better.

    But I wasn't.

    Rather, I still think I am (better than you describe). long story short, your 10 reasons helped me see how the sales people see me.

    So... thank you. I haven't figured out a better way to interact with our sales people, but I'll get there with eyes opened.

  •  
    22

    Ancient_One

    09/28/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    From post 16 (on theme):

    "...of course the R&D group exists ENTIRELY to serve the needs of the sales group, because if they don't make products that are sold, they're just wasting time and money."

    How will sales sell what doesn't exist. How will they specify what they don't know can be created.

    Risk capital is just that. Even in situations where that capital is not recouped, the investment of money, time, and other resources on a particular product or service may not be entirely wasted. Rigidly adhering to an inadequate implementation is a problem, but one that may be outside the scope of R&D once production controls the manufacturing agenda. However, that is a different region of the topic...

    The capability to sell an inadequate product may demonstrate excellent sales skills in the near-term, at the expense of long-term relationships with the client. Would you consider managing the persistentce of that relationship an example of marketing form within Sales?

  •  
    23

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    09/29/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 22:
    Quote: How will sales sell what doesn't exist.

    If something isn't sold, it's a hobby, not a business. This is a business site. You're talking about engineering as a hobby. BTW, speculative R&D is always sold to investors either on the ground of 1) it's entertainment value or 2) possibility of future products.

  •  
    24

    Ancient_One

    09/30/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    My questions about engineering appears to have been misunderstood.

    R&D takes place in several environments. Some is legendary for beginning in basements or garages, then being sold to companies or investors. Some R&D is performed by dedicated start-ups. Some is performed by companies that specialize in engineering, or perform R&D for new product development within the company (usually at least partialy in-house). The last environment is largely the subject of my pair of questions, which seems quite a professional realm though not the typical retail storefront.

    How can sales sell what doesn't exist? Hopefully they can participate in selling the next version or the upcoming new product (or service). How will they do so unless they understand the product or service well enough to explain how it can be useful, or at least how it can be used? If they can perform that role, they should also be capable of relaying pre-release client feedback to both management and R&D. If they can, does that put sales in a sufficient marketing role to render a separate marketing unit unnecessary?

    How much can sales assist with product or service conception if they do not understand things like the technologies upon which the product is based? R&D often involves trade-offs that can confuse most everyone. Some feature cost-effectiveness may not be obvious to sales, marketing, or management without a design review that includes actual cost values (difficult to get from hobby-level developers). Feature selection for new or improved products may also target new markets, for which the existing sales associates may not have relevant experience.

    My impression is that marketing has some role in these areas. Some of the necessary work will involve research that would take time that would be taken away from sales with potential commissions. Valid measurements for the research and analysis would be an improvement over any number of past examples.

    What might be an interesting counterpoint demonstrating your assertions would be Microsoft Vista. That was released as both a new and improved product. Vista provide a variety of techological services, that was characterized by significant changes in fundamental operation from previous versions along with a lot of gee-whiz features, yet appears to have been developed from the perspective of an organizatinally-strong internal marketing group that overlapped with senior management and assumed sales would be automatic. Developed by professionals (they were getting paid and there were investors), Vista does leave something of a hobby impression .

    What portion of sales teams are capable of these support levels? What is the proper role of marketing in relation to sales in this environment? How can sales staff make the transition to effective participation in that role?

  •  
    25

    tboyd54

    10/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    I come from a sales background first in my career and moved into marketing/media over a period of time. So I have had the pleasure of looking at this debate from both sides. I understand the frustrations of the sales side. A bad marketing idea can kill the flow of leads or calls or customers walking in the front door. This requires the salesperson to do their own "marketing" to attempt to get the buyer to the table. If marketing is working well and the proper message is being sent, it sure seems to make the sales job a little easier.

    As a saslesperson I constantly reminded people of my worth by pointing out that " nothing happens until a sale is made." From the marketing side I point out that "It makes it tough to make a sale until some marketing is done to raise awareness of the product offering." Either by the marketing/media department or by the salesperson themselves. So to believe that one plays more of a role than the other will always be up for debate. Our media can make the phone ring off of the hook only to have "order takers" answer and not close sales. On the other hand I could have the greatest sales staff in the world and if we cannot get the interest in the product through some sort of marketing then their skills are wasted. Marketing can be as simple as service being great and word of mouth about the great service gets around.

    I'm sure this debate will never be solved. A great balance between the two departments makes things much much better. Working together to find out what the customers needs are and then showing how your product can fulfill those needs better than anyone else's product is one of the main keys. Always remember that a bad salesperson or a bad marketing campaign can kill the best product in the world.

  •  
    26

    Geoffrey James, Sales Machine

    10/01/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Re Note 25:
    Actually the problem is being resolved even as we speak. Technology is making marketing measurable. I recently spoke with a company where 70 percent of the qualified leads -- as accepted by the sales group -- are generated from the marketing team. This company is growing like crazy...even in the midst of a recession that's clobbering their sector. I'm going to write something about them next week. Meanwhile, check out this post:

    http://blogs.bnet.com/salesmachine/?p=5743

    It has a video that says all you need to know about unmeasurable (i.e. "strategic" or "brand") marketing.

  •  
    27

    r?mulo

    10/08/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Why Pay For Lousy Marketing?

    Goeffrey,

    I'm a salesman. I think you're overreacting, maybe you've
    had only bad expierence with marketers, maybe some new
    MBA PMs.
    But, there are some good marketers, that help creating
    products, services, new approaches, business intelligence,
    and when they're good, a strategic approach.

    And also, not all sales is made through salesforce. Concepts
    like positioning, segmentation, are the basis for creating
    winning sales strategies and sales operations.

    I think you're right about marketers that think they are the
    key, and act like they are. Salespeople do that too. And
    few salespeople is really damned good. Most stink, and they
    loose their jobs. Marketers don't loose their jobs, even when
    they stink, but don't be mad about that, their job is really
    boring.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement

Blogger Profiles

  • Blogger Thumbnail Geoffrey James Geoffrey James has sold and written hundreds of features, articles and columns for national publications including Wired, Men's Health, Business 2.0, SellingPower, Brand World, Computer Gaming World, CIO, The New York Times and (of course) BNET. He is the author of seven books, including Business Wisdom of the Electronic Elite (translated into seven languages and selected by four book clubs), and The Tao of Programming (widely quoted on the Web as a "canonical book of... more »

advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement