CHIEF MARKETING OFFICERS AND ACCOUNTABILITY

They’re at it again. B2B recently published it’s Who’s Who in B-to-B in it’s 2005 Marketers Resource Guide. B2B annually selects their picks of the top agencies and marketers (see my original post).  Once again accomplishments like "gained market share", "increased revenues", "dislodged industry leader", "increased margin", "increased price", "decreased marketing budget" were COMPLETELY missing from the accomplishments stated by the annointed marketers and agencies. And I do mean completely missing. Of the 40 marketers and agencies none were acknowledged for having achieved a single accountable metric.

It is interesting that in the same publication, in a article dated November 8, 2004 and titled "Marketing Accountability Demand Increases"  a study was referenced indicating that 81% of senior marketing executives said "accountability had increased in their marketing organizations over the past 24 months". Jim Speros the CMO of Ernst and Young and former chairman of the Association of National Advertisers went so far as to say "Marketing in many ways has gotten a pass from being held accountable". But the most fascinating statistic from the study was that only 59% of marketers surveyed said marketing programs must show a return on investment – which also means that 41% were still not required to demonstrate any ROI.

All of which begs the question of what are appropriate metrics for measuring marketing accountability? There are three measurements that should be used. The first is market share. The second is revenue growth. The third is margin growth. Share, revenue and margins are the lifeblood of the enterprise and every marketer in partnership with their sales organization needs to live and die based upon these metrics. So next year when B2B annoints their best marketers of the year maybe one or two might be selected because they increased market share. Is that asking too much? Do you hear me Ellis?

Subscribe ARMORY|Book MOBILIZATION|Engage CAMPAIGN