When it comes to brand, what do Marketing and HR have in common? An iceberg!
We all know the tried and true metaphor of the iceberg that reminds us of the importance of taking into account what’s under the water to get a deeper understanding of the whole situation. Many marketing and human resources executives understand they face an iceberg-like dichotomy that has frustrated their best efforts in applying their professional competencies to exert more direct impact on the customer relationship that drives their organization’s financial performance.
The marketing executive is frustrated over what appears to be a governor on his/her ability to build a stronger brand that strengthens the customer relationship and leverages the organization’s marketing resources. On the other hand, the human resources executive has a difficult time making a more direct connection between their employee engagement efforts and the impact on the customer relationship. What many marketing and human resources executives don’t realize is that there is a simple and congruent solution that will satisfy their frustrations. More importantly by working together they will create a synergy that produces mutual satisfaction and ultimately benefit the organization’s growth objectives.
Okay, I know this sounds a bit complicated or even convoluted, but let me take you through my logic one piece at a time.
Marketing’s Iceberg
Let’s start with the marketing side of the coin, if for no other reason than it is where I have spent most of my time-in-grade. That is until the last few years where I have spent much more of my time in a particular part of the marketing world that cross-borders with HR. My time and new perspective on this cross-functional territory that lies at the nexus of marketing and human resources has evolved slowly starting about 10 years ago when I was asked by one of our innovative clients to take on a leadership problem in an unconventional way by using a marketing-oriented (brand) approach.
Brand is not complex and relates to all organizations. At the core of every thriving organization is a belief that it has a unique combination of values, competencies, and people all guided by a business model that enables it to deliver distinctive value to a target group of customers. Those unique qualities define their brand of doing business. The organization has earned a strong brand when customers acknowledge the distinctive value they receive and admire the organization for the way it does business. This fundamental understanding of brand makes the link between human resources and marketing essential, no matter the nature of an organization’s marketing budget and activities.
Generally speaking, marketing has the responsibility for managing the relationship between the customer and organization. In essence this boils down to guiding the organization to focus its brand of doing business on the needs of its targeted customers and at the same time making sure the organization gets credit from its customers for consistently delivering that unique value. No one said marketing was easy! In many organizations marketers have not been provided the tools or the position to be accountable for managing both sides of that equation. Even in the most sophisticated marketing organizations, marketing’s influence has not been wide enough to deliver on the true promise of building a strong brand.
It is becoming conventional wisdom among marketers that there is a two-part process to building a strong brand. Delivering distinctive value is the first, most important part of brand building. To consistently deliver the brand’s value requires the efforts of the majority of the organization. The leadership framework and processes to focus the organization’s values, competencies, and passions is called building the brand on the inside. The second part of building brand equity is the process of using marketing communications to get credit for the value an organization provides to its customers. This effort is called building the brand on the outside.
Generally speaking the visible part of an iceberg is 12% - 14% of the entire mass. The implied lopsided ratio has an analogy for marketers when it comes to brand building. If one had to apportion the effort to build a strong brand it would be an 85/15 ratio, where 85% of the effort is required to deliver the distinctive value (inside brand building) and 15% for the marketing communications to get credit in the marketplace (outside brand building). This ratio is a generalization and depends upon a number of different factors, but it is fundamentally sound.
Unfortunately the purview of many marketers has been on the part of the brand that’s visible in the marketplace that can be impacted through effective marketing communications. While this restricted perspective can help build a stronger brand, it lacks the level of influence that produces the necessary leverage to build sustainable brand equity. The part of brand building that has the most leverage lies below the surface, so to speak, with the majority of employees who together have the most sustainable impact on the qualities that make the brand valuable.
Leadership and organizational development provide the most potent levers that can impact the largest part of the brand-building mass. Too often these levers are not normally within the reach of the marketing department. It is very difficult for marketers to reach out and impact the part of brand building that exists below the surface. The first challenge is to convince the senior management team of the importance of internal brand building. Even if the senior managers are open to the new perspective, marketing has no credibility in the organizational development competencies required to create change within the organization.
Let’s give marketers credit; it’s not that they didn’t know that this disparity exists. On the contrary, many very good marketers were (and continue to be) very frustrated by their lack of direct influence over the parts of brand building that can make the most difference in building sustainable brand equity. In some industries like consumer packaged goods marketing professionals have much more influence over the entire business mix. Anecdotal evidence suggests this broader span of influence results in more effective brand building.
So marketers are frustrated and their organizations are losing out on the opportunity to effectively build a stronger brand.
Stay tuned for the rest of the iceberg dilemma from the HR executives’ perspective.
Posted by Karl D. Speak
Tags: Brand, brand inside, internal brand building, marketing