Study of Marcom Programs Reveals Obvious: Most Suck
Because sometimes a press release actually offers usable information, "A new survey on the state of integrated marketing communications, released by the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), reveals that 67 percent of marketers develop integrated marketing programs across most or all of their brands, but only 33 percent say they are very happy with their efforts. The findings, based on responses from more than 85 major advertisers, were released today at the ANA's first annual Masters of Integrated Marketing Conference at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in New York City." Now that we know what we already knew, we can move on.
Comments
I am not surprised by this. As a writer of marcom plans for clients, I find that most marketers focus on "tactics" not the strategy undergirding the tactics. If the stratgey is smart, competitive and indelible, then the tactics are more apt to deliver...Steve
Do you remember:
"In the June 2005 edition of Harvard Business Review (subscription only) there were some eye-opening and worrying statistics on the effectiveness of 500 various consumer and B2B marketing programs:
- 84% resulted in less market share, not more
- Most customer acquisition efforts did not break even
- Fewer than 10% of new products succeeded
- Most sales promotions were unprofitable
- Advertising ROI was below 4%
- Doubling advertising expenditures for established products increased sales just 1% - 2%"
from Ben McConnell at
http://customerevangelists.typepad.com/blog/2005/06/dont_blame_the_.html
In a survey, direct marketers in our agency's database listed these top obstacles to success: low budgets, tight schedules, organizational factors, and cultural issues.