What Does That Buy Us?
“People buy tactics in times of uncertainty. They buy strategy when times are good.”
My friend Chris Brogan said that the other day. It struck me as profound.
We’ve seen this in our own business: when the budget axe chops into Marketing, the conversation can quickly move from “What’s the right thing for us to do, to move the needle?” to, “What can we get for $X?”
(For the record 99% of these conversations with our clients are conducted in a spirit of partnership, not arm-twisting.)
The purchase of TACTICS over STRATEGY occurs because tactics are tangible. When the marketer is asked by the finance guy, “What did we get for $X?” it is helpful to unroll a bulleted list of stuff.
But the results of a tactical approach that has no strategic backbone are tangible, too. In terms of lost opportunities, lost sales, mockery of the brand, irretrievable foul-ups.
Let’s dream up a real-world example. As is usually the case when it comes to short-sighted marketing, we can start with a Shiny Object. Many mistakes are made when the glint of the Shiny Object obscures our vision. Twitter is the marketing world’s current bauble...
What if the brand marketer asks the agency to “monitor Twitter for stuff we should respond to” but doesn’t have the budget to create an overarching Twitter strategy?
Without a good strategy, the marketer might assign 140 different people to respond to the various issues that crop up in the Twittersphere (“140 people, 1 for each character space, and boy do we have some characters here!”).
Without a good strategy, the marketer might not ensure that each person discloses their employment in a consistent way … They might not create a scalable, clearly-articulated process to escalate hairy issues that can’t be readily solved … They might not educate those 140 different people on how/when/why to get engaged, and when/why they might sometimes need to sit on their hands …
Obviously a good agency will leap into the fray before things get too dicey for their client — damn the costs — but I am trying to illustrate the need to think deeply and to consult with experienced partners before rummaging through the Social Media tool box.
The mistakes the brand marketer might make as a result of too little time/money will be more egregious for having been made very, very publicly.
You’re better off finding current money to do right than losing future money by doing wrong.
Posted on: June 5, 2009 at 7:51 am By Todd Defren
Comments
Social Media Comments
-
RT @IUMastersinPR: Shiny Object Syndrome: in difficult times, companies start choosing PR tactics over strategies [link to post] -
Shiny Object Syndrome: in difficult times, companies start choosing PR tactics over strategies [link to post]
Subscribe by Email
Todd,
Great post. I work for a small agency doing Internet Strategy and get to experience firsthand what you’re talking about. Lots of people get obsessed with the tools (“We HAVE to get on Twitter”) but don’t really know what to do once they get there.
Obviously some clients are a better fit than others, but we’re trying to take a step back and figure out what they want to accomplish with their online presence and social media – THEN figure out what tools will help them accomplish that goal.
The other thing I wanted to add to the discussion is that most people don’t realize that SM is very time and labor intensive. Not being able to say ‘what you got from that’ instantly in dollars and cents is sometimes what prevents clients from really putting the time and money behind a comprehensive social media strategy.
Thanks for the insight. This is certainly a post I’ll pass on.
@romanelli
@ryancmiller
Great insight about tactics and strategies — thank you.
But I wonder where objectives (e.g., measureable, specific, realistic) fit in when responding to an economic downturn. I’m new to PR and still struggle with the fine balance between objectives, strategies and tactics. It doesn’t help that some textbooks use ‘strategies’ and ‘tactics’ as interchangeable terms.
Would “monitor Twitter for stuff we should respond to” qualify as an objective? As a good one? Much thanks.
Couldn’t agree more with “What Does That Buy Us” post. See this article in Thursday’s NYT on generally the same topic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/business/smallbusiness/04sbiz.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=tools,%20not%20toys&st=cse
I loved the “tools, not toys” reference.
I loooove this quote: (“140 people, 1 for each character space, and boy do we have some characters here!”).
Thanks for sharing Todd.
Tactics vs. strategy seems to occupy quite a few bloggers’ minds these days. Katya’s Nonprofit Marketing Blog, Brains on Fire, Chris Brogan, you, me… Hunkering down to tactics almost seems like a natural way to deal with the uncertainty of tough times. It’s concrete, it’s instantly measurable, it justifies the need for people’s jobs. Perhaps when developing strategy in good times, we should incorporate bad-times contingencies so we can avoid tactics driving our marketing.