There are a number of definitions of marketing but it is generally understood to be a process whereby a business seeks to achieve one or more objectives, usually profit or growth related, by understanding, and meeting customer needs. For not-for-profit and public sector organisations those objectives might be less overtly ‘commercial’, but the key feature of ‘understanding the customer’ should remain and is central to the practice of marketing.
Defining Marketing and Marketing Communications
Marketing communications or ‘MarComms’, to use a popular shorthand, is a sub-activity within marketing, and for which there are also a wide range of definitions. At the simplest level, it is the collective term for the range of media channels that can be used to reach an audience, such as TV advertising, social media, public relations (PR) or direct mail. These channels are sometimes classified according to whether they are paid for, such as advertising, are those which may be owned by a business, such as websites and point of sale material and finally, the publicity which is generated or ‘earned’ by consumer interactions on channels like social media, or by coverage in media editorial.
This ‘channel’ approach to MarComms does however somewhat undervalue its strategic elements because at its heart, Marcomms is about engaging audiences and generating a response in a planned and organised way. And that response can range from informing, persuading, reassuring, reminding or differentiating, through the provision of either or both emotional and factual messaging and content.
One of the key concepts in MarComms is the ‘Marketing Mix’, which should be the end product of a rigorous planning process and which is also often known as the MarComms or campaign plan. It might be helpful to put a number of these and other terms and activities in context….
I have referred to the marketing mix or MarComms plan. This should reflect and be a function of the MarComms objectives, which in turn should be a product of the marketing objectives and strategy, which in turn should reflect corporate or business strategy. All this can seem rather unwieldy and a lot to take in, and in practice often results in many of these terms being used interchangeably, which is confusing and unhelpful. There is then a tendency to oversimplify and jump straight to channel selection, using marketing myths in place of logic and rigour e.g. TV is expensive, direct response ads generate sales, PR doesn’t work, digital is more accountable etc, etc. This can be overcome by approaching MarComms planning logically and rigorously.
Understanding Integration in Modern MarComms
However, what is critical to understand is that MarComms, however important it is, is not marketing, despite the frequent mixing of the terms. This is perhaps understandable; MarComms is often the most visible, outward expression of marketing strategy and depending on the business sector, it can consume large amounts of the marketing budget and consequently receive a disproportionate amount of management attention.
A MarComms plan is also sometimes referred to as an ‘IMC’ or ‘Integrated Marketing Campaign’, and this introduces another key concept in modern MarComms, that of ‘integration’. Following an unfortunately familiar feature of the world of marketing, there is no single definition of Integration. For some, it stretches no further than an expectation of ‘matching luggage’ – that all campaign elements should look the same or clearly derive from the same creative expression.
For others, it will signify that a ‘media neutral’ method to planning has been used. Such an approach is aimed at providing a check on planning that might otherwise be overly focused on a particular channel, such as TV. There are then varieties of Integration which focus on organisational structure and emphasise a ‘matrix’ approach, helping to avoid particular business function ‘silos’, such as Sales or IT, dominating the planning process, or ‘Portfolio’ planning, where a plan is developed in the context of Marketing a range of products and services (and where there might be, for example a ‘halo’ product receiving an apparently disproportionate amount of MarComms support). None of these approaches to the integration of MarComms channels is mutually exclusive, and all will be considerations.
The Four Pillars of MarComms Planning
Planning the marketing mix is underpinned by four basic factors; the audience/s, the task/s, the budget and the degree of control required and the detailed application of these factors will necessarily vary according to things like the industry, market size, structure and the purchasing decision cycle.
Again, this tends to understate what is involved and it is worth saying something about one of the most important activities in the planning process. At the outset I said that one of the defining features of marketing is the central position of the consumer. This is particularly true during this planning stage where it is vital that, wherever possible, decisions are based on deep and meaningful consumer insights and an understanding of how the particular market operates.
Consumer Insights: The Heart of Effective Planning
You need to be able to answer five key questions:
Who
Are you targeting?
What
Do you need to say to them?
How
Will you reach them?
When
Do you need to reach them?
Why
Will they be receptive to you?
As well as guiding the MarComms mix, the answers to these questions will translate into things like Market segmentation, Positioning, and support decisions in areas such as Pricing. For further reading consider ‘How Markets Grow’ by Byron Sharp (Reference 1).
One of the most important elements of effective MarComms, and one of the least understood is campaign evaluation, and measuring effectiveness. There is a notorious quote, generally attributed to the 19th century US retailer John Wanamaker that sums up the challenge:
"Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half."
John Wanamaker
This rather brutal epigram haunts advertising, and the wider marketing industry, to this day, and helps contribute to a sense that it is profligate and lacks accountability. Setting aside the rather obvious question of how he knew that it was 50% that was wasted, and the fact that other business functions are often at least as wasteful, it does highlight the challenges around campaign evaluation.
The debate about evaluation and effectiveness has also not been helped by the development of concepts like ‘Performance Marketing’ (is there another sort of marketing?) or the growth in digital channels based on spurious rigour and measures such as ‘likes’, which studies have shown have little bearing on campaign effectiveness.
A comprehensive review of this topic is outside the scope of this short paper, but it is possible to make a number of relevant points that practitioners should consider. Campaign evaluation should actually begin before the campaign has begun, with the setting of appropriate objectives and metrics. These need to be measurable and relevant (see reference to ‘likes’ above) focusing on outcomes rather than outputs wherever possible. Ideally these measures will have been benchmarked and proven through testing. Other tools include the use of tracking studies and econometrics, with the aim of building up insights and learnings about the most effective campaigns. And of course, the assessment of different creative approaches will be part of the development and evaluation process. (see Alex Batchelor’s paper on ‘Market Research in this series).
The term ‘Marketing Mix Optimisation’ is often given to the process of improving MarComms effectiveness, by varying and measuring the effects of different channel inputs. Return on Investment or ROI is an often used (and misunderstood) measure in these models and it’s worth looking at the late Tim Ambler’s paper in this series on that topic too.
Balancing Short-term and Long-term Marketing Activity
A particularly knotty question is whether to focus on short term or longer-term marketing activity, and this is increasingly relevant in a business environment where there seems to be ever great pressure to achieve quick, immediate results. One of the most interesting and influential reads in this area is ‘The Long and the Short of it’ by Binet & Field (Reference 2).
Their topline conclusion was that what is needed is a combination of long-term brand building activity with a level of shorter-term sales support. The mix of these types of activity will vary according to industry sector, as will channel selection, and their paper provides more detail on this.
MarComms is a detailed and complex area and heavily outsourced, with client companies using a wide range of external suppliers, primarily media owners, and a bewildering array of agencies and specialist consultancies. In recent years this ecosystem has been added to by suppliers operating in the ‘Martech’ and digital space. It is important therefore that MarComms practitioners understand this world and are adept at setting appropriate targets and KPIs for these suppliers, just as you would for a campaign, reviewing performance regularly to ensure effective performance and that objectives are met.
So, in conclusion, MarComms is an important component of an effective marketing plan, but it should not be confused with the overall process of marketing itself. Its implementation should be centred on a rigorously planned MarComms plan, with customer understanding and insights at its centre. This will sit within an overall Marketing Strategy and plan, and activity should be carefully and regularly reviewed.
Authored by Chris Macleod, Chair of Fellows
References:
How Brands Grow: What Marketers Don't Know by Byron Sharp OUP 2010
The Long and the Short of it: Balancing Short and Long-Term Marketing Strategies by Les Binet and Peter Field. IPA, 2013 (Update)
