There's a new CMO in the house...
... and when there is, there's usually a new marketing company following right behind.
Sometimes it's a new CEO, other times the chief marketing person. Doesn't matter. This is one of the reasons I'm convinced we're unlikely to see many of the trans-generational relationships we used to see a lot in the brand management business.
David Kiley writes about this in his BusinessWeek blog, "Brand New Day":
"Why do new marketing chiefs ... feel the need to put a bullet in an ad agency that is obviously doing a good job after they ascend to a new position?"
I've been one who has put a lot of value on "relationships," so on the one hand, a new executive might be commended for wanting to support his mandate with a marketing partner he knows and trusts. But on the other hand, when the incumbent - and the work they have been doing - has been wildly successful (as Fallon, for instance, was with BMW)? Are you sure you want to make that change? A good relationship isn't always a good enough reason.
Sometimes it's a new CEO, other times the chief marketing person. Doesn't matter. This is one of the reasons I'm convinced we're unlikely to see many of the trans-generational relationships we used to see a lot in the brand management business.
David Kiley writes about this in his BusinessWeek blog, "Brand New Day":
"Why do new marketing chiefs ... feel the need to put a bullet in an ad agency that is obviously doing a good job after they ascend to a new position?"
I've been one who has put a lot of value on "relationships," so on the one hand, a new executive might be commended for wanting to support his mandate with a marketing partner he knows and trusts. But on the other hand, when the incumbent - and the work they have been doing - has been wildly successful (as Fallon, for instance, was with BMW)? Are you sure you want to make that change? A good relationship isn't always a good enough reason.
posted by Mark Burris - BURRIS at 12/03/2005 12:52:00 PM
3 Comments:
Makes sense to me, though, and for the most part is probably self-serving. If the CMO is supposed to be the trusted expert heading up a company's marketing arm, then a new one has to find problems even where there may not necessarily be any. Making changes is a way to bolster his/her image as someone who is going to "fix" any problems and justifies his/her position. In some cases, it's even a diversionary tactic to shift focus away from a CMO's incompetence (Yep, I've seen it firsthand. It may take a couple years, but this usually backfires on them). Anyway, an outside consultanting firm is an easy target because there aren't as many internal politics or HR issues.
I've also seen new CMOs want to restructure with vendors and consultants that they have had a successful working history and relationship with. Even if it turns out to be a lateral move as far as measurable results, the proper spin can make it look like an improvement. Wait, I just realized you said that.
As far as trans-generational relationships go, very few people nowadays stick with a company long enough to build any meaningful, longlasting relationships or loyalty. They've become a lot like sports teams - lots of player swapping and, after a few years, the only thing about the team that is the same are the uniforms.
TLL -
Thanks for weighing in on the topic. Your interests are as broad as your eloquence is consistent. Are you truly a "renaissance" person?
Ha! I guess I just have a lot of opinions about a lot of things.
Post a Comment
<< Home