Change We Can Embrace

Once we feel we have a process in place that accommodates the unique complexities of one of our marketing operations, the next step is to figure out how to make it work. It’s one thing to know what roles, steps, assets and decisions an operation requires. It’s another to make all of the connections, enable the collaboration and retain some level of control over making it happen. Much of the time we are forced to turn to what we have at hand – spreadsheets, email, phone calls and general-use project and resource planning platforms – to try to make the process work. Suddenly the process that seemed so masterfully tailored becomes a pain to put into action.

Understandably, we don’t want to change a process that has been created around the specifics of our operation. Unfortunately, when we go looking for ways to make carrying out our process less of a pain, we are faced with options that would alter, if not scrap, the process or even hand complete control over to a third party. That’s the point at which acceptance of pain that’s familiar wins out over the pain of starting from scratch. It’s also when marketers become reluctant to change the way we do what we do.

That’s not to say that such resistance to change is right, wrong or indifferent. It does, however, answer the question, posed two days ago, of why marketers are reluctant to change when it comes to the way we do what we do. It also brings to mind the rationale that we should not universally avoid changing the way we make our processes work.

While it may not seem as such, there are solutions for marketers, purpose-built for specific jobs, that adapt to the processes we already have in place. Change does not have to mean starting over. Change can simply be an exchange of one tool for another that is more efficient; for one that enhances the process and makes it work like we know it can and should. Change in the way we do what we do as marketers is not always something to resist, fear or avoid. When it’s right, when it works with us and for us in the way we want it to, internal change is something for marketers to embrace as much as we hope we can effect change in the marketplace!

Change We Can Embrace

Do We Fear Change...Or Something Else?

Some may say the reason that we as marketers and marketing operations professionals are reluctant to change in the way we do what we do is fear of the unknown. That’s a cop-out. Marketers aren’t afraid of the unknown. We regularly charge forward, damned near blindly, into the unknown. If we fall flat on our face we’ll try something different and call it A/B testing! Well, okay, that may be a slight exaggeration, but still there is almost always some element of the unknown in marketing and it doesn’t hold us back.

It’s not fear of the unknown that gives us the cold sweats when we think about making some internal change to the way we do what we do. I’ll tell you what it is, because after many years, I can finally and freely admit it.

It’s fear of the ‘pain in the ass.’ Or, perhaps more accurately, fear of a different ‘pain in the ass.’

Let’s face it, marketing is a complex machine and operations within it are bound to be equally intricate. There are many different people, in nearly as many different roles, all with different concerns. There is a seemingly endless stream of details, deadlines and moving parts; all requiring decisions. Even when an organization recognizes the unique parts, connections and flow it needs, making the process actually happen is a pain. But it becomes a familiar pain. Unfortunately, as long as it results in some level of organization and effectiveness, the pain becomes not only familiar but also accepted.

When change promises to alleviate the familiar and accepted pain, we see it as merely swapping one pain that we already live with for another, the pain of starting over. Why would we want to do that? In cases where change impacts the actual process – the parts, the connections and the flow – fear of trading one pain for another might have some validity. But what about change that impacts the tools used to make the process happen and not the process itself? What about change that actually makes the process work better and easier, like it’s intended to work? Perhaps there is a worthy trade-off?

We’ll explore that more, stay tuned.

Do We Fear Change...Or Something Else?

Do We Fear Change...Or Something Else?

Some may say the reason that we as marketers and marketing operations professionals are reluctant to change in the way we do what we do is fear of the unknown. That’s a cop-out. Marketers aren’t afraid of the unknown. We regularly charge forward, damned near blindly, into the unknown. If we fall flat on our face we’ll try something different and call it A/B testing! Well, okay, that may be a slight exaggeration, but still there is almost always some element of the unknown in marketing and it doesn’t hold us back.

It’s not fear of the unknown that gives us the cold sweats when we think about making some internal change to the way we do what we do. I’ll tell you what it is, because after many years, I can finally and freely admit it.

It’s fear of the ‘pain in the ass.’ Or, perhaps more accurately, fear of a different ‘pain in the ass.’

Let’s face it, marketing is a complex machine and operations within it are bound to be equally intricate. There are many different people, in nearly as many different roles, all with different concerns. There is a seemingly endless stream of details, deadlines and moving parts; all requiring decisions. Even when an organization recognizes the unique parts, connections and flow it needs, making the process actually happen is a pain. But it becomes a familiar pain. Unfortunately, as long as it results in some level of organization and effectiveness, the pain becomes not only familiar but also accepted.

When change promises to alleviate the familiar and accepted pain, we see it as merely swapping one pain that we already live with for another, the pain of starting over. Why would we want to do that? In cases where change impacts the actual process – the parts, the connections and the flow – fear of trading one pain for another might have some validity. But what about change that impacts the tools used to make the process happen and not the process itself? What about change that actually makes the process work better and easier, like it’s intended to work? Perhaps there is a worthy trade-off?

We’ll explore that more, stay tuned.

Do We Fear Change...Or Something Else?

Change is Good, Except...

Some might say that marketing is all about change. After all, as marketers and marketing operations professionals, we’re always faced with change. A new product to bring to market? That’s change. New target audience for that product? That’s change too. New messaging and channels to communicate with that audience? Yep, that’s also change. Change is so commonplace that it not only becomes part of our routine; it becomes something that we expect and welcome. Because without a steady flow of new products, targets and campaigns, there wouldn’t be a demand for what we do!

And speaking of doing what we do, when you boil it down, one of the primary goals of marketing is to effect change in the marketplace. We want to change the way our audience looks at its needs and wants. We want to change the way they think about that new product they’ve never seen before. We want to change their buying and consumption habits. We want them to change their minds and decide that what they already have isn’t enough so that they’ll keep buying more.

Change drives why we do what we do. Getting others to change is the goal of doing what we do. So why are we so reluctant to change the way we do what we do? Why is the thought of replacing the inefficient, ad-hoc drudgery that we’ve been forced to rely upon with new software so cringe-worthy? Why do we resist adapting to new things that make doing what we do faster, easier and even better that before?

Think about that and stay tuned…

Change is Good, Except...

Change is Good, Except...

Some might say that marketing is all about change. After all, as marketers and marketing operations professionals, we’re always faced with change. A new product to bring to market? That’s change. New target audience for that product? That’s change too. New messaging and channels to communicate with that audience? Yep, that’s also change. Change is so commonplace that it not only becomes part of our routine; it becomes something that we expect and welcome. Because without a steady flow of new products, targets and campaigns, there wouldn’t be a demand for what we do!

And speaking of doing what we do, when you boil it down, one of the primary goals of marketing is to effect change in the marketplace. We want to change the way our audience looks at its needs and wants. We want to change the way they think about that new product they’ve never seen before. We want to change their buying and consumption habits. We want them to change their minds and decide that what they already have isn’t enough so that they’ll keep buying more.

Change drives why we do what we do. Getting others to change is the goal of doing what we do. So why are we so reluctant to change the way we do what we do? Why is the thought of replacing the inefficient, ad-hoc drudgery that we’ve been forced to rely upon with new software so cringe-worthy? Why do we resist adapting to new things that make doing what we do faster, easier and even better that before?

Think about that and stay tuned…

Change is Good, Except...

Direct Mail Marketers Get Gifts from USPS

The United States Postal Service just experienced what it projected as its busiest day of 2015. Of course in the weeks leading up to Christmas, the post office is on the minds of many as they await the delivery of gifts purchased online and from catalogs. This year, in addition to an ever-growing quantity of mail-order purchases, the USPS is also delivering some interesting gifts to direct mail marketers.

Although it is only available as a pilot in certain New York City ZIP Codes, the USPS has rolled out what it is calling the Informed Delivery app. App users will be able to see images of their mail each day before it arrives in their mailboxes. For now, the app uses the basic black-and-white photos the USPS captures of the front of every letter it handles.

However, according to a recent article in Direct Marketing News, services could be expanded. One of the possibilities mentioned is a value-added service where direct mail marketers can have links placed in the photos of their mail that the recipient can click. In the near term, the article cites the ability for recipients to see the mail that is intended to reach them before someone else in the household disregards it as unimportant. During an earlier, smaller test of the service, response rates to direct mail were said to be nearly twelve times higher among app users compared to non-users.

On broader scale, the USPS has also planned promotions for direct mail marketers in the coming calendar year. Building upon the promotions it offered in 2015, the 2016 plan includes incentives for the use of advanced printing technologies as well as crossovers between print and digital.

In the Tactile, Sensory and Interactive Mailpiece Engagement promotion, the USPS will offer a postage discount for registered marketers employing innovative use of advanced printing techniques. Techniques including specialty inks, sensory elements, textured papers, folds, die cuts and other elements can be interacted with and manipulated by the recipient.

As part of the Emerging and Advanced Technology/Video in Print promotion, mailers incorporating Near Field Communication (NFC), Augmented Reality (AR), or integrated video in their mailpiece can earn an upfront postage discount of 2%. In addition, mailers will be able to receive the same discount for A-B testing of response rates between versions with and without the advanced technologies.

Aside from a nice discount, what does this mean for organizations that rely on direct mail for marketing communication? For one it provides a strong sense of encouragement for marketers, designers and print buyers to think outside of the box. Additionally, it further proves that print is not only adaptable to today’s digital society, but that it actually helps drive it. As the demands and expectations placed on printed marketing communications become more complex, so do the specifications, schedules, files and production needs that bring them to fruition. Managing all of this is no simple task. It requires the flexibility, power and know-how that only specialty training and purpose-built tools can provide. It’s another page in a long history of print leading the way in graphic communication innovation and one that those of us dedicated to it are excited to turn.

Direct Mail Marketers Get Gifts from USPS

6 Reasons Why Business Process Outsourcing is Dead

A decade and a half ago business pundits in the marketing procurement area hailed it as a savior. Business process outsourcing – or contracting the operations and responsibilities of marketing procurement to third-party service providers – promised cost savings that would increase a company’s flexibility. According to these pundits, business process outsourcing provides some advantages that can increase flexibility. It helps transform fixed costs into variable costs. It allows more focus on core competencies. It increases speed in certain processes by removing them from within the organization’s bureaucracy.

Business process outsourcing is not, however, without its downside. As the business environment has changed over the past fifteen years so have many organizations’ views and values of flexibility. This has brought to light issues that work against the advantages of business process outsourcing. Even Wikipedia notes that service issues, unclear contracts, changing requirements and unforeseen charges, coupled with dependance on the business process outsourcer (BPO), actually reduces flexibility.

With that in mind, the only conclusion is BPO is dead and here are six reasons why.

1. It’s Too Expensive

BPOs charge fees for their services and markup what they procure to make a profit. As organizations demand more from their BPOs, those fees and markups increase negating the promise of flexibility-enabling cost savings. As an example, a review of InnerWorkings’ 2014 financials indicate revenue of $1,000,133,000 and gross profit of $229,459,000. This surplus accounts for a 22.9% excess companies paid beyond the actual cost of the printed marketing materials.

Businesses seeking more than the ability to off-load work to someone else can save more without the BPO interfering as a middleman.

2. It Takes Control Away

At first the idea of making supporting operations someone else’s problem sounds inviting. Then something goes wrong that makes an impact on core functions and the control that was given away is sorely missed.

When an organization has control over all of its operations potential issues can be caught before they impact core functions. Just ask any marketing department.

3. It Blocks Transparency

Giving up control also means giving up transparency into details that are critical to planning and budgeting for resources, projects and strategies. Without transparency, efficiency stagnates, reliance on outsiders is compounded and flexibility suffers.

With the help of software built for the operation at hand, organizations ensure transparency, achieve efficiency and become more flexible on their own.

4. It Impacts Quality and Service

While a BPO may not set out to reduce quality, its idea of what constitutes the best quality and level of service probably differs from yours. Giving up control also means giving up your definition of quality and service levels.

Operations responsible for the production of marketing materials critical to an organization’s image are better served when control remains within the organization. Creative cannot communicate clearly its ideas to the marketing manufacturer through a middleman. Its like the children’s game of whisper in my ear and I’ll whisper into someone else’s ear, and guess what was originally said.

5. It Stands Between the Organization and Its Vendors

When an organization uses a middleman like a BPO there is no direct relationship with vendors, resulting in goods and services produced with little interest or knowledge in who will use them or how they will be used.

While vendor relationships require careful monitoring and management, the synergy between organization and vendor is often valuable to the outcome of a project.

6. It Puts the Organization at the Mercy of Another

By using tools built for automated communication, process optimization, establishing accountability, gaining full transparency and instant reporting, an organization can gain flexibility while not being beholden to a third party for results.

Business Process Outsourcing is Dead – Software Tools are Alive

Some think that business process outsourcing is a way to minimize marketing procurement operations in order to focus more resources on core operations. Unfortunately, experience can prove otherwise.

Marketing initiatives can only be optimized when marketing procurement remains in charge, gains full transparency into projects, works with trusted and proven vendors, and has control over the dollars that would better be spent on improved marketing initiatives. By obtaining powerful software tools to support marketing procurement, efficiency improves, costs go down and more market reach can be obtained for the same or less market spend.

Marketing procurement has one goal and that is to produce the best marketing possible within budget. BPOs also have a goal which is to maximize their brokerage fees.

6 Reasons Why Business Process Outsourcing is Dead