This little quote from Lorrie Foster, The Conference Board:
"But the focus of marketing has evolved toward more strategic, value-added activities that can be quantified and linked to corporate goals. New approaches, methodologies and tools, and technologies are making it possible to link marketing investments directly to revenues and profits, holding marketing executives accountable for achieving expected results."
Note: If your companies marketing department isn't linked to corporate goals, you have bigger problems to worry about than ROI.
Utilizing technological marketing channels today, the quick launch and adoption of it, most of these channels are new themselves, breaking down traditional communication barriers. The hot-properties like FaceBook and Twitter don't even have a sustainable revenue plan, and marketing executives are expected to compute an ROI when using services like this?
Ultimately, ROI is reflected in EBIT. Finding the most successful method of increasing sales is a constantly moving target. Listing the entire properties a company could advertise with, just Internet-based, would be enormous. I'm not saying there shouldn't be ROI, because someone has to watch out for that marketing manager who has way too many events in luxurious hotels.
If companies had tremendous products, there wouldn't be a huge dependence on marketing. I think too many companies focus on the message and not the product.
Food for thought: Will the next version of a "Marketing Coordinator" position just be someone surfing message boards, social media sites, and Twitter, posting raves and shutting down rants? And how is ROI measured on that?
No comments:
Post a Comment