Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Integrated Marketing’ Category

In Washington DC everyone seems to understand the term “strategic communication.” It simply refers to the professional practice of helping organizations and individuals become better understood. But in other places I continue to have people ask me “What is strategic communication?”  These people are more accustomed to the terms “public relations and advertising.”

In past posts I have referenced how public relations and advertising as a field of study became strategic communication in my work. Simply put, it was a matter of my concluding that a new and more complicated world required bringing other related disciplines into my thinking and planning.

Over the years I have seen everything about communication become more complicated. Media revolutions changed everything, from the array of tools I used to consumer impact and choices. As technology made the world smaller, the internationalization of virtually every industry added cultural and political complications. And so as institutions struggled to be better understood in a universe of information clutter, earlier promotion and advertising campaigns were no longer sophisticated enough.

And so some of us became “pioneers” in our struggles to cope with this new complexity as we began to look to other fields of study to bolster our work. I experimented with adapting integrated and strategic marketing ideas to communicating academic institutions, and wrote three books about it (www.case.org/books). This changed our thinking from promoting what was there, to getting involved with planning and rethinking programs, price, distribution, and communication simultaneously… realizing that no amount of communication can make a program or institution successful unless it meets a perceived need.

This new way of thinking led to realizing that the field of “group dynamics” provided leadership tools to get everyone on the same page with respect to competitive advantage, and to motivate them to help tell the story.  This added energy to the power of “word-of-mouth,” which in a new media world could become even more powerful as internet “buzz!”  And this led to looking at the field of “organizational behavior” to understand how to deal with various leadership styles and internal political issues which too often became barriers to success.

And so many of us adopted the term “strategic communication” to describe what we believe to be a more substantive approach to public relations and advertising, one that incorporates the study of integrated marketing, group dynamics, and organizational behavior to meet the challenges of a more sophisticated world.

Read Full Post »

We have been discussing the role of group process in strategic communication and integrated marketing. Last week’s post described the use of brand clarification groups.  This process not only produces more precise mission, values and vision statements, it also produces lists of competitive advantage characteristics which can then be prioritized into powerful branding themes. The challenge now is to communicate this clarified brand identity to every individual in every constituent group in today’s extremely complex media environment.

My first suggestion here is to have these statements and themes on a single sheet of paper on the desk of everyone on the communication staff.  In this way whenever they are preparing official statements or editing official materials they can make sure they are including consistent brand identity reinforcing messages and stories wherever possible.

My second suggestion is to form an ‘editorial priorities committee” that uses this “branding sheet” as a guide to brainstorm a list of compelling institutional stories that will reinforce these statements and themes. This committee can have both inside and outside the institution membership so that all constituent perspectives are represented. It can then meet periodically to review and refine a master story list. Repeating key reputation defining stores creatively using a current “news hook,” or a new angle, rarely gets old with audiences that have a natural interest, or even potential interest, in a particular organization.

All corporate magazine editors deal with the issue of whether or not institutional “information” publications exist primarily to report the organization’s news, or to focus primarily on promoting positive achievements and distinctions. My experience suggests that the most popular institutional publications achieve readership credibility only by doing both. They report the news, including all sides of controversies… and they rigorously reinforce brand identity.

We live in a world of information clutter. Imaginative repetition is precisely what is needed to cut through that clutter and establish sustained brand clarity and reputation. And this clarity is precisely what is needed to achieve long-term institutional goals.

Read Full Post »

This post continues a series about the role of group process in planning and managing a strategic communication program. What differentiates strategic communication from traditional public relations and advertising is bringing the subject matters of organizational behavior, integrated marketing, and group dynamics into the field.  And group dynamics tools are key to clarifying competitive advantage, brand identity, and to mobilizing  and motivating people to go out and tell the institution’s story.

The most successful brand clarification projects begin by forming small brainstorming groups within each constituent category. For example, university executives might commission several small homogenous groups of students, faculty, administrators, alumni, donors, community leaders, and parents simply to come together to list those features that make the institution special or unique.  Experience teaches that they will list prominent fields of study, outstanding student opportunities, unique experiences or traditions, internal culture characteristics, commonly held and articulated values, campus landscape features,  colors, textures, and even geographic location differentiators. Brainstorming will produce a long list. The next task, then, is to put them in priority order, and finally to identify the top 4 or 5. Most of the time these groups will produce very similar lists.  It may surprise you how often collegiate as well as other institutional experiences turn out to be very similar.

These priority ordered lists should then be given to a smaller representative committee to review. These people should merge them into a final list of 4 or 5.  A good writer, should now be able to write mission, vision and values statements based on them. These statements, along with the branding points list, can now be officially approved by the institution’s executive committee and board of trustees. They then become the foundation guidelines for all official institutional communication.

This is a widespread institutional listening exercise. Everyone who participates always enjoys it.  It takes time, but the buy-in is critically important. People love to talk about the experiences they had in college, or with any institution where they have been involved. Everyone can end on the same page, and are now in agreement with respect to what makes the place so special.

The final outcome of this project will be accurate positioning statements and brand characteristics that volunteer and professional leaders helped produce together. And the resulting consistent messaging is what eventually will cut though today’s mind-numbing media clutter, and clarify the institution’s distinctive competitive advantage in the marketplace.

Read Full Post »

Last week I discussed the use of task forces in integrated marketing. They are a key part of bringing marketing, organizational behavior and group dynamics into what many people think of as the public relations and advertising field. Action teams are also extremely powerful tools in creating the perception that an institution is stepping out and claiming new prominence as a leader in the world.

Action teams are useful in solving specific problems or in launching new initiatives, especially those with the potential of attracting widespread attention. A university might need to recover from an unfortunate institutional crisis, or is ready to unveil the results of a bold new strategic plan.  In either case, bringing the best thinking and most creative talent in the institution together to address the situation can be very powerful.

An effective action team is made up of the best talent in the institution no matter where they are located. They might be in central administration, or in fine arts, or even in athletics marketing. They can come from anywhere. The key is talent and creative thinking. First of all, it is helpful to have a person on board who knows the current research findings and can design a simple survey if needed.  You will also need an experienced strategic thinker and planner, a writer who can write concise copy after listening to planning discussions, a designer who can produce art that symbolizes ideas they helped develop, and a project manager who can put it all together into a plan of action.

You will also need to be able to pull these highly talented people off the job into a truly integrated and ongoing process. This most often will require the authority and support of the president.  Most action teams will not take up all of its member’s time, but they will need to be able to make this project their top priority for however long it takes.

I have found that well structured and facilitated action teams can be the most powerful tool in the integrated marketing toolbox. So the more you know about how to create them, and the more experience you can get in managing them, the more success you will have in putting your institution on the map.

Read Full Post »

Following last week’s post, one of my readers said: “Tell me more about how task forces work in integrated marketing. I think most readers least understand the group process aspect of integration, and yet you suggest that it is a critical component.”

I have described the way I view the strategic communication subject matter as bringing the substance of marketing, organizational behavior, and group dynamics into what many still call the public relations and advertising field. And in doing this, the additional skill of group facilitation becomes a key part of professional practice. Where many managers are too impatient to use group process in decision-making, I assert that significant organizational transformation and advancement becomes possible though informed, empowered, and inspired groups.

Institution-wide task forces have the potential to get a critical mass of informed people on the same page with respect to  competitive advantage.  I have found this to be the case even in very large institutions. And when “inside” people are telling the same story on the outside, their “word-of-mouth” impact can be extremely powerful.  Today such messages find their way into social media, and when they go “viral” they become what we call the “buzz.”

An effective task force is made up of representatives from the major program areas inside the institution. These should be people who have some instinct for, and/or interest in, marketing communication, not necessarily the administrative heads. The primary agenda topics should be (1) the identification of the institution’s brand identity, (2) the clarification of how each program’s distinct sub-brand identity connects with the overall brand, (3) keeping each other informed about what the others are doing, and (4) helping each other solve problems and address issues.

Getting people on the same page with respect to competitive advantage requires facilitated group process. Therefore, it is a significant aspect of “integration” in today’s integrated marketing and communication practice.

Read Full Post »

This week I spoke to a gathering of university advancement professionals from the Big 12 Athletic Conference.  Most attending were from the fundraising or alumni relations areas of advancement, and so I was asked to offer an overview of how “integrated marketing” is different from traditional university relations.

I began by asking them if their university claimed to have an “integrated” marketing and communication operation. My question was prompted because I have been noticing lately that many universities using the term are not really providing truly integrated programs.  And in addition, some with the marketing title are only advertising directors. And still more are not actually practicing classic marketing. Rather too many are still merely sending out information about programs and services, just the same as institutions have been doing for years.

My message for the conference was that those professionals in fundraising and alumni relations without the support of a truly integrated marketing and communication operation were not being well severed.  Merely sending out information was only adding to information clutter, and the university was not likely benefiting very much from that.  In this digital age, more information clearly is not better. But the right information managed by a truly integrated operation does have the power to transform, no doubt about it.

So what does true integration require?

Transformative marketing and communication requires integration at three levels:  (1) Following the traditional marketing model of the “4 P’s,” program design and brand identity, pricing and discounting, distribution of the total experience and place, and strategic communication and promotion, must be planned and implemented simultaneously so that they all address the needs of the market.  (2) Preferred media must be used for each market segment and sent simultaneously and intensely in order to cut through the clutter. This multi-platform approach should be a combination of old and new media. And (3) carefully orchestrated group processes must be employed in order to get everyone “on the same page” with a common understanding of the institution’s competitive advantage. This will require using institution-wide task forces, carefully composed creative action teams, and other small groups, to clarify brand identity and test ideas.

This integrated approach to marketing and communication clearly can transform institutions. And for my audience this week it can bring strategic thinking, new technology, and facilitated group process to help improve donor loyalty and recognition, as well as to bring together professional programs, communities of interest, career services, events, enrichment courses, and much more,  into portals providing lifetime total university access.

Read Full Post »

Today’s increasing stress between the various levels of American society deeply concerns me. We often seem to be blind to the dependence we all have on each other. It seems so obvious to me that we must all work more constructively together in order to fulfill the idea of America. Endless demonizing and polarizing just has to be counterproductive to our own “equal opportunity for everyone” ideal.

The announcement of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate could signal a desperately needed new day in an otherwise destructively negative presidential campaign. Now both sides have a renewed opportunity to offer a clear choice, and with it an opportunity to stay focused on the positives of both ideologies. Up to now the political rhetoric on both sides has been dangerously widening the gap between Wall Street and Main Street, thereby reinforcing growing divisions between the wealthy, middle class, labor, and the poor. 

What makes this even more disturbing is that extreme polarizing tendencies also seem to be infecting some of our organizations and institutions. Even inside many businesses (i.e. the airlines), intense conflicts seem to be solidifying between executive management, middle management, and those that deliver customer services. And even in many universities, gaps have significantly widened between administrations, faculties, and their trustees. Each situation has its own characteristics, but what has become all too common is this tendency for groups to become more consistently polarized.

Conflict between groups such as these gets worse when constant debating and ranting only strengthens self-centered positions, when each group isolates itself professionally and socially from the other for extended periods of time, and when the news media finds that theses conflicts can be the kind of news that makes attention-getting headlines every day.  Relentless and consistent attack-driven communication can dangerously split our society, our businesses, and our institutions, and can over time threaten our way of life.

The very idea of America is predicated on a different kind of democratic principle, and a more constructive approach to debating differences… or so it seems to me. It is true that everybody is free to express strong opinions and positions anytime and anywhere they wish. But it also seems obvious to me that everyone must also ultimately share the responsibility for constructive citizenship, and determined conflict resolution. 

I have found through working with institutions and universities that every part of every organization and every society is ultimately dependent on the other parts for genuine progress. One area cannot function well without all the others functioning well too.  Orchestrating progress therefore means planning ways to move all units ahead collaboratively. They are mutually interdependent, and it’s just too destructive to allow bitter infighting to continue beyond a reasonable period of aggressive, but also mutually respectful, debate.

Read Full Post »

I have encountered “group think” in executive teams in many institution over the years. In each case it was a very dangerous situation. The eventual consequence is that leaders lose their abilities to effectively guide their institutions through rapidly changing conditions.

Group think happens this way:  An executive team first finds success managing in a certain set of market circumstances. They may have followed their instincts and got lucky. Or they may have followed market research. Whatever the explanation they were able to find a successful model and manage the institution effectively over a period of time by following it.  However, in doing so they gradually stopped receiving external information. They no longer welcomed input. They began to reject criticism, and silently felt threatened by new ideas. Simply put, they became isolated while the world outside was changing.

On the other hand, some executive teams manage to avoid destructive “group think.”  And in my experience these teams tend to have a common set of  behavior characteristics:

1. They understand they must out-learn their competition. They must stay on top of  industry trends, continue to study their market, and stay current on new technology. And to do this they put specific mechanisms and programs in place which ensure that constant team learning takes place.

2. They operate in a culture where they do not compete for resources.  Rather they challenge each other to come up with the best possible proposals to advance each area of operation. Then, they collaborate on setting priorities and making budget allocation decisions.  Everyone is heard, and everyone buys into the compromises essential to moving forward together.

3. In addition, every member of the team celebrates colleagues when they achieve something significant…an award recognition in their field or a success in the institution. Everyone puts aside any tendency for professional jealously by frequently articulating the positive outcomes of these team celebrations.

4. Outside input is invited on a regular basis. Research is conducted. Consultants are invited in to share ideas. People inside the organization with thoughts or criticisms are invited to the table to express them. Everyone understands that the tendency for executive isolation is natural and universal, and that overcoming it is the only road to continued success.

In the final analysis, “group think” as a result of executive isolation is the primary reason institutions fail, aristocracies decline, civilizations fall, and entire societies disappear. It is the lesson of history. Every public or private executive  team in every society must therefore learn this lesson. Otherwise, they will falter for a while, and  then very likely fail.

Read Full Post »

I got into a discussion with colleagues this week about the meaning of the word “integration” as it applies to all areas of university advancement. I explained my approach to the topic this way:

Integrated marketing is simultaneously considering product, pricing, program delivery, and communication so that communication can be effective.  It’s impossible to communicate a wrong product, or a product that is priced poorly and delivered inefficiently.

In fact, brand identify is often the primary product of an academic institution. It is what constituents are actually “buying.” And so integrated group processes become essential to clarify a differentiated brand identity and to stimulate essential word-of-mouth communication.

Integrated communication is using multi-platform media tactics simultaneously to converge intensively enough to cut through today’s media clutter. Effectiveness comes from using only the preferred media tactics of each market segment and age group.

Integrated planning usually results in using both “old” and new media, as print often still serves as the tangible “hold-in-your-hand” symbol of an institution or program while electronic tactics facilitate information searching  and two-way relationship building.  I think of integrated communication as “orchestrated” communication.

Integrated advancement then is the bringing together of all this with alumni relations, fund-raising, government relations, and student recruiting.  A task force composed of representatives of these areas can be used to make certain that the institution’s mission, vision, values, and how they come together in branding themes, are commonly understood.

Confusion and breakdown can also be avoided by implementing integrated advancement. For example, in both alumni relations and development there are tendencies to want a brand and logo for every event and program.  Campaign directors also often think a separate theme and logo are needed for fund-raising to be successful.  Yet, if everything an institution does is really to advance the overall brand, why would any of these activities need a separate identity?  Does this not work contrary to the cause?  Imaginative ways to enhance overall brand intensity can be found through integrated planning.

Ideas about how knowledge in one area can strengthen another are also uncovered through integrated planning. For example, how does what development officers know about building relationships with donors help people in communication with their news media constituents.  When the role of each is better understood by the other new ideas emerge that strengthen the whole.

Alumni relations professionals are beginning to expand their programs so as to function as a “portal” through which all alumni can access the total university for their lifetime.  Development operations are also looking to other advancement areas for help in addressing concerns about donor fatigue and loyalty. And marketing and communication practitioners are devising media platforms and strategies to help upgrade the effectiveness of the other advancement areas.

Integrated advancement therefore is simply using group processes and coordinated communication tactics to speak with one voice.  This results in a differentiated, competitive and effective brand identity. And it’s a compelling brand  identity that enables an institution to achieve its primary goal of academic distinction.

Read Full Post »

I spent a half-day this week with the institutional advancement officers in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System. In the past my impression had been that many state systems were in a constant search for clarity of role and identity. But this week I collaborated with a highly energized group of professionals, and as I reflected on our time together I came to see more clearly just how they might function effectively in this current environment of government cut-backs and public criticism.

1. Who better than a state system can put together an impressive case for state support of higher education, and then to represent it in the legislature with one voice and ongoing persistence? Who better can make an effective case for insuring diverse access, meeting workforce needs, stimulating economic development, researching new products, solving community problems, and much more?

2. Who better can lead the rethinking of core business plans? Cut-backs are likely to remain permanent to some degree. What will  be the new ratio of revenue sources?  What proportion will now have to come from tuition, philanthropy, federal government, state government, fees, etc.?  How can we insure the needed amounts from each source will be available?

3. Who better can coordinate the best professional development programs, and provide access to the best experts in the fields of philanthropy, alumni relations, marketing and communications?  A new level of sophistication will be required in all these areas to meet future revenue and admissions needs, and the system can make sure this is available to every member.

4. Who better can assess the impact of globalization on the institutions in the state and guide a planned response?  Both opportunities and threats will have to be taken into account as a part of core business rethinking.  Does it make sense to have programs abroad?  What is the likelihood of foreign institutions successfully rasing money and recruiting students in this region?  How should each institution respond? 

5. Who better can help clarify where and how institutions can cooperate, and yet compete at the same time. For example, where might institutional student recruiting, and therefore marketing and communication initiatives, overlap? Where might the same donors, foundations, and corporations be solicited by individual institutions?  And what are new and better ways to build donor loyalty and avoid back-to-back campaign donor fatigue?

6. And who better can facilitate making an “everyone on the same page” case for higher education to the general public?  In this age of negativity and skepticism a strategic communication initiative to clarify higher education’s overall brand identity is essential, and a state system can lead the way. Even if a system is not in a “political” position to launch such a public campaign, it might help and encourage an outside group or association to do so.

Indeed, there are many roles for state systems to play in these uncertain times.  It’s exciting to think of the possibilities!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »