One thing that has become apparent while breaking down marketing services organizations is that there are two different definitions of the term strategy floating around that have fairly different meanings.
Coming from a traditional consulting background, my thoughts about strategy have been centered on organization structure, economic analysis, financial performance, Porter 5-forces type of stuff. Very high level about you set your overall direction and steer.
In coming to know the advertising space, however, I’ve frequently seen the term strategy used to describe the process of developing “insights” about a customer segment, and then building specific treatment programs around their defined parameters.
Given I’m biased; I don’t think it appropriate to argue whether one is right or not. They both add value to the marketing organization, and they both mandate some out of the box, creative thinking.
The problem, though, arises when trying to apply this single term “strategy” against all the needs of the marketing organization. The need addressed by strategy as defined by the advertising world will never go away. At the very core, marketing will always be driven by the ability to develop insights and compelling messages. This strategy, however, does not in anyway address the overall goals and structure that need to be put into place to run a successful organization – this is the parlance of the traditional consultancies.
In the end you need strategy – two of them in fact. One that deals with building and optimizing your marketing organization for a digital, customer centric world, and another around building insights and crafting compelling messages.
The Art Of War…
…You might want to take a look at…
[...] Strategy vs Strategy – living with duality. For another [...]