Boards without marketers risk getting bitten by a reputational disaster
Most boards lack anybody with a marketing background. Businesses need to realise the value marketers bring to the (boardroom) table, argues Tim Parker.
I went to a seminar recently for those interested in becoming a boardroom non-executive director (NED).
It was disheartening when the speaker pointed out the odds against people with a marketing background becoming a NED. Quoting a Journal of Marketing study on the top 1500 companies in the US, they noted that only 2.6% of the 65,000 directors had managerial-level marketing experience.
Another study among board members showed only 4% believe marketing is important business experience to have (versus 47% who believe that finance is). And the thing that really shocked me was a claim from a leading academic that the reason is that “the board should focus on strategic issues … and not delve into tactical issues such as marketing”.
Marketing is more than a tactic
And therein lies the problem facing any marketer looking to be taken seriously at board level: marketing is too often associated with short term tactics and not with making a strategic contribution to the business.
hi mate nice article. Ive always thought that marketers trying to learn the language of the board have got it all wrong. the board needs to learn the language of marketers. marketers look after brand thats the most important thing the company has.
Thanks, Adam. Spot on. And the marketers also have to earn their place at the table by intrinsically, and quantitatively, linking brand value to enterprise value.
Pie in the sky thinking.
Study after study shows that marketers don’t get a seat at the table precisely because they don’t speak the same business language as the c-suite. The solution is to become more adept at business management and strategic thinking and NOT to insist the board starts to speak empty marketing jargon.
‘completely agree. Hence: “But marketers need to bring greater quantitative rigour to the table and demonstrate the internal rate of return (IRR) that marketing can deliver”. More empty marketing jargon simply reinforces the “lightweight” tag. Cheers
Consumer brand = marketing
Employer brand = HR
Does your HR team have the ability to coach, guide and step in to avoid rogue hires and to ensure toxic employees do not pass their probations? Get that right and the overall brand will shine.
Social reviews of every element of your brands are highly visible online. Always makes me laugh when people quote how great Branson is at treating his workers well. Then have a glance at Glassdoor at say Virgin Money…..
I agree Adam. Brands generate the wealth via share valuations.
But given the funds that are flowing/rushing to tactical online executions focussing on immediate sales, at the expense of the ‘slow burn’ of building a brand, I feel that marketers are more akin to sales managers these days.
So the tradition continues. Not only do they lack decent marketing people but also IT and HR, go figure.
Good points. When we were looking at this we found a lot of marketers were bringing the wrong mindset to the boardroom. Marketers need to be talking insights, opportunities and return on investment, not brand and campaigns.
If marketers own the product, supply chain and customer engagement, then they need to be talking about the benefits they’ve brought to this side of the business, not the latest promotions.
I don’t think it’s completely fair to criticise the boardroom, they’ll welcome marketing when we start adding value: http://bit.ly/2Yy92qK
Exactly
I’m afraid this article (or at least the comments below) is seriously overplaying the value marketing brings right now. I worked at a large back and wouldn’t put the campaign-led marketing team within a country mile of the real decision making.
Totally agree Tim, actually put it into action when I was on the board of Barker College – it was very interesting how siloed people can be and how the marketing voice brings it together to speak for the customer at all times and keep perspective on the end game.