|
|
Web News |
iTunes to offer EMI music to all
EMI is to offer all its digital music without copyright protection on iTunes, allowing music fans to download tracks to any digital music player and not just...
UK loses its nanotechnology lead
The UK government has failed to allocate enough funding to nanotechnology, and the funding that has been allocated has not be fairly distributed, according to a report on the subject from the government's...
TalkTalk getting more expensive
Carphone Warehouse has brought its fourth quarter trading statement forward to warn that costs will be £10m to £15m higher than expected for its "free"...
BBC to launch mobile TV trial
UK broadcaster BBC has partnered with mobile operators Orange, Vodafone and 3 to launch a trial to syndicate a range of its television channels and radio networks via 3G to mobile phones. The trial, which will last up to...
UK will pay £1,000 more for Adobe CS3
UK businesses will have to pay hundreds of pounds more than their US counterparts for Adobe's creative software, after the software supplier revealed the pricing for...
CSC signs new contracts in the UK
Computer Sciences Corporation, an information technology (IT) services company, has announced that its United Kingdom business unit has signed four previously unannounced contracts during CSC's fiscal...
|
|
|
04.02.07
Marketers - Must They Specialize?
 By
Mike Moran
I read an interesting post from Bill McCloskey on the need for specialization. Bill has a point, but I think there's a counterpoint, too, when specialization gets out of control.
Bill makes the case for specialization in a straightforward way: "I submit that the über marketer who is expert in all the various forms of interactive marketing is someone who just doesn't exist, or is very bad at a lot of things. An interactive jack of all trades, master of none, is not the person you want heading up your email marketing efforts."
That sounds good, but I don't agree. First, it presupposes that your marketing campaigns are big enough for all of these specialists. It might be good advice for Procter & Gamble but I don't think it's good advice for Procter Plumbing & Heating. Generalists are the only game in town for most businesses and they do a good job.
But I wonder if it is good advice even for large businesses. As someone who's spent a lot of time inside IBM's marketing apparatus, I always found specialization to be a necessary evil. Yes, you absolutely need specialists for that deep information that gives your business an edge, but the more they retreat into their professional disciplines, the more prone they are to a special brand of myopia that I have christened "Specialist Disease."
Specialist Disease can be cured, but prevention is easier as you might suspect. I understand where Bill is coming from because marketing, like every other discipline, naturally specializes as it matures. But we all must do more to convey that every professional must put the customer and the company before professional allegiances. For every time that fighting the professional battle for a best practice was the right thing to do, I've seen ten times where it wasn't—just because a specialist did not look at the bigger picture and failed to accord respect to other specialties that were more important in that situation.
I've done it, too.
Back in 2001, I remember being appalled at IBM's search marketing failure—I vowed to turn it around. So I, all full of myself as an expert, walked in to tell the IBM Webmasters how they should be doing their jobs. I told them how they needed to change their domain names and host country sites on local servers and all sorts of other wonderful best practices. To their credit, they listened and adopted many of my suggestions, but not those two.
Try a Better Way Today.
Try WebEx MeetMeNow - Click
Here |
|
It would have been horribly expensive to revamp domain names and scuttle the multi-country server hosting system. And it would have been bad for customers to deal with millions of redirected pages. So the Webmasters pushed back. I worked them far too hard before I backed down because I "knew" that I was right.
Well, it turned out the Webmasters were right. IBM has increased its search traffiic 25 times since that day, all without doing either of those things I suggested. I am happy that people took my advice in many other areas, but the Webmasters were right to ignore those two gems. We didn't need to do either one.
I learned a valuable lesson about how specialists think and ever since I have tried to have a more general, balanced outlook so that we make decisions faster with less contention. And I don't think that approach has dimmed my expertise any—I think being practical is the right way to deliver the most value with your expertise.
Bill actually seems to favor a contention system between multiple specialists to get the best result: "What you want is someone who is corralling those passionate about search, RSS, email, banners, rich media, mobile marketing, WOMM, social networks, viral into a room and figuring out an integrated strategy that makes sense."
I think that can work, but better than cross-functional teams are cross-functional people. Contention systems are SLOOOW. And what we need these days is more quick decisions and less arguing to achieve the dreaded consensus. Specialist Disease puts a real crimp in your pace. I'd rather do it wrong quickly and then fix it. Instead of letting the specialists argue, let the customer decide.
Comments
About the Author:
Mike Moran is an IBM Distinguished Engineer, expert on Internet marketing, and the author of Search Engine Marketing, Inc., the best-selling book on search marketing. Mike also writes the popular Biznology newsletter and blog.
|
