New definition of marketing

So the American Marketing Association finally updated their definition of marketing to put a stronger emphasis on customer relationships. You can read more about the change on the Peppers and Rogers web site:

The previous AMA definition of marketing, active since 1985, was: "Marketing is the process of planning and executing conception, pricing, promotion and distribution of goods, ideas and services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and organizational goals."

The new definition of marketing, unveiled at the AMA's Summer Educator's Conference in August is: "Marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders."

The article quotes several experts who say that that the definition is a reflection of what's already being done; I disagree. Yes, companies are more customer-centric. Yes, marketing departments are already playing critical roles in building customer relationships. But I think the key phrase here is, "marketing is an organizational function." I don't know many companies that have truly integrated marketing as a mindset throughout the entire organization. This definition sets the marketing executive in a more pivotal role in a company; he/she is no longer simply responsible for a department, but for "delivering value and customer relationships." It's up to marketing to work with other departments to ensure that -- from promise through delivery -- the customer experience is consistent and positive. So while the AMA is a bit late to the party, it offers up a definition that holds a lot of room to grow.

What do you think about the new definition? Does it go too far, or not far enough? What does the future hold for marketing?   

 

Comments

[aig]

what are the implications of marketing to individual

[srikanth]

Sir,

Please explain the Pricing strategy for the following items:-
1. 4 wheeler(Car)
2. Tyre for 2 wheeler
3.Health drink and Product strategy for:-
1.Mobile, Ready made Products, 2 wheeler and insurance and also

If i start a fast food restaurants, what are the parameters a co. should mind while launching? and
how would you explain marketers use of packaging?

[jyothinagarjan]

I am also searching for the same question.

[anita]

Sir,

Please explain the Pricing strategy for the following items:-
1. 4 wheeler(Car)
2. Tyre for 2 wheeler
3.Health drink and Product strategy for:-
1.Mobile, Ready made Products, 2 wheeler and insurance and also

If i start a fast food restaurants, what are the parameters a co. should mind while launching? and
how would you explain marketers use of packaging?

[Eugene Owusu Baffour]

I want more information on Marketing as I want to be educatedinthat field.
Information on
A)Fundamentals of marketing
b) Sales
C)Advertising
d)Branding
E) E-Commerce marketing
d)Retail management and other related field.Thank you and hoping to hear from you

[sufian masud sheikh]

I am Astt. Professor so in my point
of view BASIC IDEA OF MARKEING AND CORE ACTIVITY OF MARKETING IS SALE
IN FACT MARKETING ALWAYS GENERATE SALE AND SALES ALWAYS GENERATE REVENUE.
BUSINESS HAS ONLY TWO IMPORTANT THINGS.
1.MARKETING AND INNOVATIONS
SO IF U LIKE MY IDEA SO PLEASE INTIMATE ME AND I LOVE TO SHARE MORE IDEA IN FUTURE.
TAKE CARE
YOUR SUFIAN

[Raunak Baksh]

Q: what is perfect definition of marketing executive.

(1) Responsiblities.
(2)what types work he functions.
Q: what is definition of Public relation officer

(1)Responsiblities.
(2)what are his works

[Hermes]

Marketing is an organizational function; every member of the organization (any Org.) must be involved in the marketing goals as an integer part of his (her) job.

[Shawn Stovall]

Marketing is the experience first and the message second. It take an entire organization focused on the experience that the consumer has to ahcieve the goal of marketing, attracting the same customers again and new ones consistently.

[Ian Jarvela-Rooney]

I think there is just an evolutionary changing in the way we approach (sell) to the end user. Although they are seperate activities, today they are more or less integrated.

(Sales) = an individual selling 'product' to an individual
(Maketing) = marketing selling 'promise' in volume to the
masses
(Branding) = the whole organisation selling the 'truth' to the
individual.

They are all activities concerned with selling. I think there are bigger issues here.. 'identity'! Marketing is no longer just a department / marketeers domain. An internal and external organisational function.

There is no importance of having a marketing department!

[hassan]

i want to know the important of marketing dep.

[Robert]

I agree with you Jennifer... the key phrase here is, "marketing is an organizational function." I have always believed this. I actually expanded my definition to include the entire value chain. I discovered this years ago when I realized that virtually everything that occurs within a company potentially becomes a marketing problem. I believe that anyone who really understands the depth and breadth of marketing intuitively knows this.

I figured this out through experience and by asking incredibly detailed questions about the true functional implication behind popular marketing definitions. I essentially ended up with a comprehensive visual model that provided me with a view of every relationship/interdependency.

So, what does this mean? It means that they are not telling us anything that we did not already intuitively know. I believe that many businesses have forgotten marketing and business 101 and have opted for the promise of a new silver bullet. Companies that are consistently successful have always been, and still are, true marketing organizations at heart… and everything that it implies.

[Christopher Carfi]

IMHO, the shiny, new and/or improved definition still misses the point -- it is *completely* company-centric. The last line is the crux of the problem: "...managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders."

It doesn't go far enough. The times, they are a-changin...

[Elisa Camahort]

I blogged about this new definition a few weeks ago, and also thought it was pretty weak. Why? Because it does nothing to help the engineering-driven management teams around Silicon valley really appreciate what Marketing does, and why it is critically important.

Here's the post:
http://workerbeesblog.blogspot.com/2004/10/marketings-new-definition.html

I wrap it up with a sort of anti-definition of marketing...what you get if you don't prioritize and value marketing. I figured this would actually hit high tech C-levels where they live:

Marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes, and is the only thing standing between your company's strategy and a reality of shoddy product delivered late to a market that doesn't want it, need it or understand it

[Mack Zulkifli]

That's the observation every marketing head should pick up. While the Customer experience is crucial, the resistance of having a CMO gain influence elsewhere says a lot about the perception of others on his/her relationship building abilities. Beyond that, I am consulting with 2 frims that have already got the COO create awareness on customer relationship and monitor contacts across various touchpoints. CIO's are now drawing up training programs for staff to correctly input effective data from customer contacts. We are a long way off here though, as most organisation worry more on the advertising side of branding, not realising that good advertising creates expectations, at the Moment of Truth, a bad interaction would almost always put the customer in a worse receptive/perceptive position than if the ads never appeared at all.

[Jennifer Rice]

Great comments, guys. Upon second reading of the definition, I noticed a huge error/omission: it doesn't include attracting customers, which is the primary goal of marketing in conjunction with sales.

Godfrey, you say that other departments would need to report to marketing; I don't think that's necessary. I do think it's essential for marketers to build relationships with other departments to better align what is being promised with what's being delivered. Or to use Scott's words, communicate insights into customer behavior to other departments so that everyone's on the same page.

But I think in the future we'll see the rise of the Chief Customer Officer who holds the reins on the customer experience, with dotted-line supervision to all customer-facing departments. Other department heads are unlikely to allow Marketing to have that much influence in their respective territories.

[Mack Zulkifli]

Allow me to break it into smaller, digestable pieces.

1. Marketing is an organizational function. I take it that marketing now plays a comprehensive exhaustive role in a business. Is it reflective of current practice? Yes and No, because more often than not, CEO's play the Wall Street/Stock Analyst game, high powered schmoozing and engross themselves in policy matters. All are important, but nothing supercedes the creation of a systematic delivery construct that gives marketing a valid proposition to create/supply/gain market share.

2.a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers. Process! That's the keyword. Marketing is much like an assembly line, only for information and innovation. Six Sigma/Lean application or even Drucker's set of management ideals must apply first. The key to success in a process has always been, management. However, many marketeers adopt a 'maverick me' attitude and go faddish with their approach. Internal communications has always been neglected, and in a process, people must be 'on the ball' with the marketing actions. How many people have sat down to watch TV, to see their company ad appear. and go 'Oh, that;s nice, didn't know we were selling that so soon.'

3.delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders." I think this one is a little topsy turvy. Value is a commodity of choice, in most cases. Value is a highly competitive framework and ambiguos in measure and weightage. Benefit however is specific. It's the stronger of the two. How can a 'customer-centric' organisation focus inwardly and yet calim to be. Consider for a moment, deliver benefits to the customer in ways that would bring value to the org and stakeholders. Customers like benefits, that's the best way to seal relationships. It's a loyalty program embedded in the mindset of the highest levels of the company. Loyal customers keep buying, often more. That's value to the stakeholders, any day.

Congratulations though. Valiant effort, and setting the right tone to adapt marketing into the culture schematics of an organisation, not a division that has an expense account in third floor. (seen by most non-'marketing' competencies in an organisation.)

[Godfrey Parkin]

I hate it. It’s all fluff and motherhood. It uses vague trendy-speak language that NO self-respecting marketer would use in describing their own products, services, or concepts. Imagine briefing an agency to put together a campaign to communicate this new-fangled marketing concept. Imagine trying to get agency creatives to understand what marketing is, using the definition provided.

“Er, well it’s an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders.”

“Yes, but what IS it? What does it look like? What does it DO?”

“Um. You’re the creative folks. You figure it out. We just do the marketing.”

1) It’s a lot less useful than the previous definition in that the vague description could apply to many functions in an organization. The definition does not talk about what marketing IS or DOES in any meaningful way, nor does it describe its goals in a way that would make sense to someone who had never heard of marketing before.

2) Marketing is not just an “organizational” function and set of processes. Marketing’s philosophy and disciplines (neither gets a mention) apply to many fields outside of the formal organization.

3) The new definition implies, by omission, that the job of marketing has no conceptual, perceptive, or persuasive role. Marketing does NOT start with “creating” but with seeking to understand your market and competitors, and conceptualizing products, services, or experiences that will meet the needs of those markets.

4) Is the role of marketing really to “manage customer relationships”? Perhaps, at a very abstract high level. But for this to be the case in reality, you’d have to have Customer Service, Production, Sales, and every other department that has any impact on customers reporting in to Marketing. For most real-world marketing professionals, that’s a dream that is never going to come true.

Godfrey Parkin
http://parkinslot.blogspot.com

[Scott Miller]

The definition I've used for 10 years: Marketing is the applied science of consumer behavior.

The old, and new, AMA definition comes off as hopelessly generic marketing speak. The fact is this: Marketing is merely a branch of psychology -- this is marketing's foundation. Using phrases like "organizational function," "a set of processes" and "stakeholders" makes me want to slap someone upside the noggin. Get real. If this is the best the AMA can come up with, it's no wonder the marketing profession as a whole is in shambles.

[nb]

No RSS Feed here?