I like digital marketing because it evolved in my lifetime. I like it because it blends the art of marketing with the science of analytics. I like it because it’s a stable job but also new enough that huge innovations are not only possible, but achievable.
And if that’s not enough: at the ripe age of 40 it’s what I got.
So here is what I mean by the convergence of digital marketing and leadership:
Digital marketing experts abound. I was on a panel last week in Ft. Worth (Range Online – thanks for the great summit!) when Danny Sullivan, search guru extraordinaire, made the comment “what are brand marketers and large agencies waiting for before they invest more in search. Another $B in Google’s market cap?” Every head was a-nodding at the search conference. We all get it. We are the converted. But who is going to lead this change within our own organizations? Why can’t we?
Another data point: 5% of media dollars are spent online while 30% of media consumption occurs there (Brand.net, Barclays Capital, ThinkEquity Partners).
We get this, too. If I had a nickel for everytime some digital marketing expert lambasted the dinosaurs who are slow to evolve to digital marketing, I’d have at least eighty bucks. It gets a little tiresome hearing we are entitled to experience this increased adoption of online marketing. But we can feel empowered to lead it.
And it’s not just about some wishy washy. It’s about driving real decisions that result in more dollars being poured into the media we sell, the tools we build, and the services we all provide. Investment in infrastructure and tools to make digital marketing easier to by and execute. Investment in data. Ultimately, the ability to leverage digital media to drive increased profits for the companies we work for and our partners and clients.
The head of a large agency recently commented in a group meeting “it is 9X more expensive to run a digital marketing campaign than a digital campaign of the same budget.” If you are digital marketer, you are working with a very efficient media to buy and a very inefficient one to execute. Not a great selling point.
So one signpost at the crossroads at the intersection of digital marketing and leadership points to the effective way to lead change, not just talk about it.
So what’s keeping digital marketers from leading (and keeping luddites in power?) Here’s one thought: we have a mutually exclusive relationship between two populations: the first is made of solid, experienced leaders; the second of expert digital marketers. The most seasoned leaders may not fully grasp digital marketing, and the most seasoned digital marketers may be brilliant but lack the leadership experience, the tools and knowledge to become excellent managers in their organizations; to show up as credible leaders; to become coaches and enablers to their direct reports and teammates. (As someone who just turned forty, I struggle with being credible at either of these things.)
I’d love for this blog to be a forum to engage the intersection between digital marketing and leadership; to share experiences, wins, and losses. After all, the digital CMO needs to be not only a great marketer, but an even better leader in their organization and the industry. Please engage if this is interesting to you.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Oh, we’ll get there. I think the jump is a challenge because of the stamina required. The urgency of digital marketing makes us want it to happen instantly, but persuasion, regardless of the volume and nature of the methods, can take time and strength.
This may also be an appropriate comment to your post re: Millenials. And I, like you, are a Gen-Xer.
Liking the blog.
I do think there’s an important dynamic underlying the 9X comment. People from an ad media background want online to behave like offline, but I’m not convinced that advertisers should shift spending to online based on media consumption statistics. In my experience, some of the most effective online marketers don’t spend a lot on media but they do invest in the knowledge and effort to have a meaningful presence online.
@ Nico – yeah i get that we’re a savvy bunch, we can make a buck go a long way, are you saying that because smart digital marketers are, well, smart that they can leave more for offline to consume?
Not exactly. Let’s say I am talking to a business who is spending $10K/mo on online media and $90K/mo offline media. And we know that 50% of leads in their vertical come from online. Do I tell them they should be spending $50K/$50K online/offline? Maybe, but that depends on a few things:
* Is there $50K worth of media to buy? As you point out, paid search hits diminishing returns once they have good coverage of the keywords relevant to their business. There’s always more display to buy, but not if they limit their buying to well-targeted placements.
* Is the business looking for branding or leads? If the latter, I am finding that social media is influencing behavior far more than display. And as much as the big agencies would like it to be otherwise, you can’t buy your way into social media – that takes an investment in time, not CPM, CPC or any other cost/inventory metric.
Put another way: what will influence your next decision to buy a bike? Will it be a print ad? A banner? Or will it be some form of word of mouth? 10 years ago ad media would have had a much greater influence, IMHO.
I also take exception to the argument that spending more on SEO correlates to better ranking. But maybe we should leave that discussion for another post
Nico – i agree that at the micro level – the advertiser level – it is unlikely and unconstructive to think of budgets allocated between offline/online at the same ratio as media consumption offline/online. you are right there are other things (such as availability and pricing of media at play here). No way the smart marketer look at overall media consumption and then shifts budget. But on the macro level (the econ class i did NOT get a C in, at least not the second time I took it) dollars should follow consumption. If more marketers moved more dollars online to follow consumption, we could expect price increases to follow demand. That alone would shift spend (macro and micro). The point I was attempting to make in my post was that online media is undervalued due to how many companies approach their media planning and optimization, and it is up to us – as leaders – to influence that, preferably starting with where we work.
re: SEO. If you have good site content and value interaction with that content, I cannot see why spending the appropriate amount on good SEO efforts wouldn’t be the first place you would start spending. But replace “good” with “crap” and it does not make sense.
I do agree with you on social media. Have you seen this? It’s now part of my org at MS and I am psyched: http://www.melcarson.com/microsoft-lookingglass-video-demo.html
Re bikes: given that I have 8 in my garage, i obviously react to pretty much any stimulus by purchasing a bicycle.
I agree with undervalued, but I do spend more time now at the “micro” level trying to sort these issues out. Would be good to have a dialogue on this, as the economics are complex. Underlying my POV is the belief that consumption of interactive media cannot be compared to broadcast media. It’s sort of like saying that as businesses shifted from selling products offline to online, surely they would expect to pay the same for a web site as they did for their physical stores? I know that’s not your argument, but I wonder what the right approach is? Do we recommend that marketers account for spending in a fundamentally different way? Zappos famously engages all of their employees in spreading the word. Should they count all of that time as part of their marketing expense?
re: SEO – all publishers I work with know they should be investing in SEO, they just don’t know how and I can’t blame them. Let me posit an analogy: SEO consultants are to organic traffic what doctors are to health: if you know how to eat right, exercise and generally take care of yourself, you typically won’t need to spend much, but if you let your body go to hell then be prepared to shell out some jack and cross your fingers that you found the right doc.
And I work with one giant publisher who has hired some of the best “doctors” around, but still isn’t willing to kick the donuts and cigarettes.
Looking Glass looks AWESOME! When can I play with it?
8 bikes? I’m sorry, I was under the mistaken impression that I was speaking with a rational human being.
Hmm, just noticed a little irony in my response to Looking Glass – were you paid to mention that?
Nico, I only get paid when you buy something. You know, marketing is an investment.