The importance of marketing in today's organisations : exploring the role of marketing, a qualitative research

Thesis Executive Programme in Management Studies, Marketing track.

Name: Tabitha Oostra-Brussé

Student number: 10475354

Date: 26 April 2015

Version: Final

University of Amsterdam Supervisor: Dr. Karin Venetis

The importance of

marketing in

today’s

organizations.

1

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student Tabitha Oostra-Brussé who declares to take full responsibility for the content of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.

The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.

2

Acknowledgements

Writing this master thesis is the final part of my Master Business Studies at the University of Amsterdam. In this study I explored the importance of marketing in today’s organizations. The process of this thesis has been one of many different phases: it was an interesting, deepening, exciting, enriching, learning experience, and sometimes it was also a struggle. For all these experiences I would like to thank a number of people.

First I would like to say thank you to my supervisor Dr. Karin Venetis for her supervision: I experienced your support and feedback as helpful.

I also like to thank my colleagues Drs. Edwin Huijsman and Drs. Rob Koolmees and my study-buddy Marion Holtkamp MSc. for their support, insights and feedback. You really helped me to complete this thesis.

Also thanks to the experts and all the respondents for their time and openness during the interviews. Without your participation this research had not been possible.

Last, but definitely not least, I would like to say thank you to Tjerk, Ties and Teun Oostra. Without your endless support and understanding I never would have made it.

Tabitha Oostra-Brussé Arnhem, April 2015

3

Abstract

Keywords: marketing thought, marketing function, marketing activities, integration, decision making, marketing management, marketing strategy.

Triggered by the ongoing signals from practice and in the academic literature (e.g.

“Marketing has lost its mojo” (De Bruyne, 2015), “Marketing needs to get a firmer hold on the seat at the table”( Aaker, 2010)). It seemed that something is going on with marketing. But it is not clear where these statement derive from? Has marketing lost it importance? Or perhaps is marketing taken for granted and has it made itself redundant? And so is there still a role for marketing in today’s organizations?

The role of marketing fulfilled in organizations seems to be subject to change. To determine the current state of marketing in today’s organizations, this study focuses on the three general levels: marketing thought, marketing function and marketing activities to investigate the importance of marketing within organizations.

As a result the following main question is formulated in this study: “Has marketing lost its importance in today’s organizations and if so, on which of the general levels: thought, function or set activities does this decline of importance manifests itself?”

This qualitative study among fifteen respondents, in ten different organizations, confirms that the importance of marketing is shifting within today’s organizations. On the marketing thought level is seems that marketing has conquered its seat the table at within the top management teams. With regard to the functional level, the assumption can be made that the marketing function in today’s organization is in transition. That if marketing wants to prevent that it ends up in steep decline it should take the lead in the marketing decision process and try to find answers for the ongoing debate on accountability. Finally on the activity level, the assumption can be made, particularly within the area’s that are

challenging for organization as big data and social media, marketing has a strong leadership and make an important contribution.

Although academics (e.g. Homburg et al.,1999; Moorman & Rust, 1999; Verhoef & Leeflang 2009; Verhoef et al. 2011) have investigated and elaborated on the role of marketing with empirical studies, many statements about the role of marketing remain anecdotal or journalistic. This empirically, qualitative research contributes to get a more in-depth understanding of the importance of marketing in today’s organizations.

From a managerial perspective, this research provides guidance in how marketing can be deployed and elevated within firms. It becomes clear that the management should focus on the changes on the functional level of marketing.

4

Content

2.1. Marketing as a business philosophy ... 9

2.1.1. The marketing thought ... 9

2.1.2. The importance of the marketing thought. ... 10

2.1.3 Shift in the importance of the marketing thought. ... 11

2.2. Marketing as a function ... 11

2.2.1 The role of the marketing function. ... 11

2.2.2. The importance of the marketing function. ... 12

2.2.3. The shift in importance of the marketing function. ... 14

2.3 Marketing as a set of specific activities. ... 15

2.3.1 Marketing activities ... 15

2.3.2 The importance of marketing activities ... 15

2.3.3 The shift in marketing activities ... 17

2.4 Conclusion of the literature review ... 18

3. Research Method ... 20

3.1. Description of the method ... 20

3.2 Interviews with experts ... 20

3.3 Sample selection. ... 21

3.3 Research techniques. ... 21

3.4 Data analysis. ... 22

4. Results ... 23

4.1 The experts ... 23

4.1.1 The marketing thought. ... 23

4.1.2. The marketing function... 24

4.1.3 The marketing activities ... 25

4.1.3 Conclusion of the experts ... 25

5

4.2.1 Definition of marketing ... 26

4.2.2 The marketing thought. ... 26

4.2.3 The marketing function... 30

4.2.3 The marketing activities ... 33

5. Discussion and conclusion ... 38

6. Implications, limitations and suggestions for future research. ... 40

6.1 Managerial implications ... 40

6.2 Academic implications ... 40

6.3 Limitations and future research ... 40

Bibliography ... 42

Appendix ... 46

Appendix 1: Interview guide ... 46

Appendix 2: Coding scheme ... 49

Appendix 3: Quotes from the interviews... 50

6

1. Introduction

Since marketing emerged around the turn of the twentieth century when agricultural surpluses lead to look for structurally new outlets (Weld, 1916), marketing matured as a discipline and seemed to have conquered its place within today’s organizations. Thinking from a customer’s perspective has been embraced by almost all organizations and in science a lot of research is done in the marketing area (Frambach & Leeflang, 2009). On the surface this leads to the assumption that “marketing” is doing all right.

But what about the following statements that were recently made in practice?

“Marketing has lost its Mojo” Tom De Bruyne, Owner of digital champagne agency SUE Amsterdam Big

Marketing Congress, Amsterdam December 2014.

“No work for the marketing department” Janine Bos, Marketing & Sales Director Randstad, Big Marketing Congress, Amsterdam December 2014.

“From now on marketing is called brand management within Procter & Gamble”

www.adformatie.nl, July 2014

Beside these signals from practice, academic literature also presents a similar sentiment regarding marketing. For instance:

“Marketing gets no respect in the boardroom”. (Shultz, 2003)

“The marketing function is in steep decline” (Webster, Malter, & Ganesan, 2005). “Marketing is becoming marginalized at a time when it is most needed” (Seth & Sisodia, 2005)

“Marketing is losing its influence on the corporate strategy level”. (Nath & Mahajan, 2008) “Marketing is losing ground within firms” (Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009) (Verhoef, et al., 2011) “Only 10 per cent of the meeting time in boardrooms is devoted to marketing issues”. (Argyriou, Leeflang, Saunders, & Verhoef, 2009)

“Marketing needs to get a firmer hold on the seat at the table”. (Aaker, 2010)

“Marketing organizations are stuck in the last century”. (De Swaan Areons, Van den Driest, & Weed, 2014)

These statements suggest that there is something going on with marketing in today’s organizations. But where do these statements derive from and what do they mean exactly? Has marketing lost its importance? Has marketing lost its influence on essential matters? Or perhaps is marketing taken for granted and has it made itself redundant? So is there still a role for marketing in today’s organizations?

7 It has been established that the role and the importance of marketing highly depends on how top management perceives marketing. In organizations where the top management team has a clear and shared understanding of marketing and the role it should fulfill, marketing seem to have more influence within that organization, then in organization where this is not the case (Webster, Malter, & Ganesan, 2005).

Additional research claims that in top management teams where there is a Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) present or the Chief executive officer (CEO) has a background in marketing, marketing plays a relatively more important role (Homburg, Workman, & Krohmer, 1999). On the other hand research shows that there are less and less CMO’s in boards of directors (Leeflang, 2004). However ten years later it seems the CMO has regained its seat at the table, in a recent IBM CMO survey that was published in 2014, was stated that CMO’s are wielding more and more power in the boardroom because CEO’s increasingly call on them for strategic input. In fact, the CMO now comes second only the CFO in terms of influence he or she exerts on the CEO.

Beside the presence of a CMO and the background of the top management team, it appears that top managers have a short term view with regards to marketing. This is probably caused by the fact that most corporate managers have a strong focus on short term financial metrics (Lehmann, 2004). This contradicts with the perspective that marketing contributes in the corporate strategy e.g. (Webster, 1981; Ruekert, Walker & Roering, 1985). To do so marketing should have long term instead of short term goals. A closely related problem to this short-term perspective is the fact that marketers have difficulty with measuring their productivity. In many firms marketing has a difficult time justifying their expenditures and return on their investment. This inability to account for marketing’s

contribution has undermined its stand with the firm (O'Sullivan & Abela, 2007). According to Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) this is due to the fact that metrics that measure long run effects are lacking and that marketers are unable or unwilling to use the appropriate measures or methods.

A different issue that shows that the role of marketing is changing, is the fact that over the years marketing has become everybody’s responsibility and that everybody should be a part time marketer (Brown, 2005). This has led to the fact that marketing activities have become more integrated with other functions e.g. (Workman, Homburg & Gruner, 1998; De Ruyter & Wetzels, 2000; Krohmer, Homburg & Workman, 2002; Homburg & Jensen, 2007). A consequence of this integration is that the marketing function will receive a less prominent place in the organization and this will likely lead to the fact that marketing will lose their influence on decisions that are made in the marketing area. This development seems to be confirmed in the yearly CMO-surveys. The survey results suggest that marketing is losing its leadership in for instance in marketing activities as marketing analytics, Customer

Relationship Management and target/market selection.

Based on the foregoing it becomes clear that the role marketing fulfills is subject to change and it manifest itself in various areas and levels of an organization. To determine the current state of marketing in today’s organizations, this study will focus on the importance of

8 marketing considered from the three general perspectives of marketing, marketing as a thought/ a business philosophy, marketing as a function and marketing as set of activities. Consequently this study will provide a more in-depth understanding of the importance of marketing in today’s organizations.

As a result the main research question of this study has been defined as follows:

“Has marketing lost its importance in today’s organizations and if so on which of the general levels: thought, function or set of activities does this decline of importance manifest itself?” In order to answer the main question of this research the following sub questions need to be answered:

- What is the marketing thought?

- What is the importance of the marketing thought? - Is importance of the marketing thought shifting? - What is the marketing function?

- What is the importance of the marketing function? - Is importance of the marketing function shifting? - What are the marketing activities?

- What is the importance of the marketing activities? - Is importance of the marketing activities shifting?

This thesis is organized in the following manner: firstly a review of the literature provides insight in the phenomenon of marketing on the three general levels of thought, function and activities. This overviews will provide relevant insight in the importance of marketing regarding these three different levels and if that importance is shifting. Then the set up and the design of this qualitative research is described and the results of this study are

presented. Finally the consequences of the research are discussed and academic and managerial implications are addressed.

This study will make an academic and managerial contribution. Firstly, it provides insight in the importance of marketing on the three general perspectives which provide academic value by adding to the body of knowledge on the role of marketing. Secondly, from a managerial perspective it will provide guidance in how marketing can be deployed and elevated within organizations.

9

2. Literature review

There is a general consensus that marketing can be viewed from three different

perspectives. Firstly, marketing as a discipline, as a business philosophy, a corporate culture that determines and guides, the marketing principles within an organizations. In this study further called the marketing thought. Secondly marketing can be seen as a function, this relates to the way marketing is organized within firms. And finally marketing can be perceived as a specific set of activities.

To determine the importance of marketing within today’s organization this study will address marketing from these three perspectives.

2.1. Marketing as a business philosophy

2.1.1. The marketing thought

Marketing can be seen as a business philosophy, as an organizational culture. A general definition of an organizational cultural is the starting point for “the way we do things around here” (Deal & Kennedy, 1992), a set of values for the organization. Therefore the marketing thought can contribute to this organizational culture.

Over the decades, the way of marketing thinking changed. Marketing has moved its

dominant logic away from the firm to the customer, from product to services and benefits, and from transactions to relationships (Vargo & Lusch, 2004).

At beginning of the 90’s the implementation of the marketing concept was called market orientation. In the market orientation theory two major perspectives developed, one is that it is can be seen as a behavior of the organization. How organizations to deal with marketing intelligence (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990). Secondly market orientation is seen more as an

organizational culture which most effectively and efficiently creates the necessary behaviors for the creation of superior value for buyers and, thus, continuous superior performance of a business (Narver & Slater, 1990). Or as Desphandé et al. (1993) defined it as a set of beliefs within an organization that put the customers interest first. In both perspectives market orientation is about focusing on the customer and competitors.

In the meantime most organizations have come to realize that they exist by the mercy of their customers and that customers are important and not just a necessary evil if they want to survive. Therefore many organizations have adopted the idea that it is marketing’s most important responsibility to put the customer first, to create superior value for them and align this with the organization performance (e.g. Leeflang, 2004; Frambach & Leeflang 2009; Leeflang 2011).

A more recent development in the marketing thought, according to Kumar (2015), started at the beginning of 2005. The marketing field started to bring more accountability to

marketing activities and this emphasis on justifying marketing actions into financial terms, marketing is now seen as investment rather than an expense item. This investment oriented approach as Kumar calls it in combination with the customer focused approach placed marketing at a crossroads of finance, accounting, technology and operations.

10 Also because of the change and developments in media usage, the focus on marketing effectiveness and efficiency and realizing firm value through customer engagement, according to Kumar (2015) the emerging paradigm for marketing is also clear, marketing must be an integral part of the organizations decision making framework. This calls for a complete integration of marketing with other functions.

2.1.2. The importance of the marketing thought.

To realize the marketing thought throughout an organization, top management plays a crucial part (Brown, 2005; Verhoef & Leeflang 2009; Verhoef et al.,2011). For instance in top management team where there is a CMO present or the CEO has a background in

marketing, marketing plays a relatively more important role thorough the whole organization (Homburg, Workman, & Krohmer, 1999).

In addition, Leeflang (2004) and Webster et al. (2005) state that marketing will flourish in organizations where the top management has a clear and good understanding of marketing and its role. If the top management team has their focus on the customer and they organize that there is a customer orientation throughout the whole organization, according to

Webster et al 2005 this indicates that they comprehend the way marketing should work. Webster (1981) and Ruekert et al. (1985) state that marketing should plays a role in the corporate strategy. The corporate strategy is all about the creation of a unique and valuable position to create sustainable competitive advantage (Poter, 1996), which indicates that this has to do with the long term vision of an organization and therefore for marketing there should be a long term focus. Another angle of incidence for the fact marketing should be about the long term is the shift of organizations from marketing products to cultivating customers. Therefore according to Rust and Moorman (2010) organizations should focus on the long term with measurements as customer profitability, customer life time value, customer equity and less on product profitability, current sales, and market share. Concerning this long term focus for marketing it appears that in general top management has a more short term emphasis. This is caused by the fact that most managers have a strong focus on short term financial metrics (Lehmann, 2004). These short term measures appear to be dominating the management decisions and detriment strategic thinking and the customer focus within organizations (Webster et al., (2005). A closely related problem to this short-termism is the fact that marketers have difficulty with the capability to measure their productivity (see 2.2). In many firms marketing has a difficult time justifying their expenditures and return on their investment. This inability to account for marketing’s contribution has undermined its stand with the firm (O'Sullivan & Abela, 2007). According to Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) this is due to the fact that metrics that measure long run effects are lacking and that marketers are unable or unwilling to use the appropriate measures or methods.

11 Thus to determine the importance of the marketing thought in organizations, it seems to be a good departure point to look at the composition of the top management team, to find out if there is a CMO present and/or to find what the background is of the members of the management team. Subsequently it is interesting to find out if the top managers are

customer oriented, because marketing’s main responsibility is still to put the customer first, create superior value for them and align this with the organization performance. In

accomplishing this it will help if there is a long term focus in organizations with regard to marketing instead of a short term (financial) emphasis.

2.1.3 Shift in the importance of the marketing thought.

With regard to the marketing thought the first shift can be observed within the composition of the top management team and then, particular the role of the CMO. At the beginning of this century research shows that there are less CMO’s in boards of directors (Leeflang, 2004). However it appears that the CMO has regained its seat at the table, in a recent IBM CMO survey that was published in 2014, was stated that CMO’s are wielding more and more power in the boardroom because CEO’s increasingly call on them for strategic input. In fact, the CMO now comes second, it appears that only the CFO exerts more influence on the CEO. This could be an indication that marketing is gaining ground and therefore its importance is increasing within organizations.

In addition Kumar (2015) suggest that if marketing can bring more accountability to their activities, marketing will consequently earn a more important place in the corporate broad room. However this call for accountability continuous to reverberate for more than fifteen years (e.g. Moorman & Rust 1999). This maybe suggest that marketing perhaps is not capable to deliver an answer to this call. Which might lead to the result that this will affect the importance of the marketing thought in a negative way.

On the other hand with regard to the heightened emphasis on justifying marketing actions in financial terms, Kumar (2015) suggests that marketing is no longer seen as an expense item but as an investment variable. This indicates that marketing has accomplished a more long term focus that will benefit the importance of marketing.

2.2. Marketing as a function

2.2.1 The role of the marketing function.

From the organization structure perspective a functional structure appears when tasks are grouped into departments based on similar skills and expertise. This can be efficient as people with common expertise work together but it can lead to conflict if functions have different perceptions of organizational goals (Boddy, 2014).

When organizations became more market oriented, they made an evolutionary step in understanding the customers and their competitors (Narver & Slater, 1990). Because the market orientation became an organizational culture it meant that the whole organization should anticipate on what happened in the market and react to that effectively. A

consequence of the market orientation culture was that, marketing became everybody’s responsibility and according to Brown (2005) therefore everybody should be a part time marketer. Herewith the marketing function dispersed throughout the organization and

12 other functions began to deliver their contributions in the marketing area. This resulted that in many organizations the marketing function was no longer just the playground of the marketing department (Frambach & Leeflang, 2009).

2.2.2. The importance of the marketing function.

Moorman and Rust (1999) concluded that to be profitable firms must not only be market oriented but also have a strong and influential marketing department. However with the dispersion of the marketing function throughout the organization, a consequence is that marketing departments are having a less prominent place within organizations. Therefore it seems that marketing is losing its influence in the marketing decision area (Frambach & Leeflang, 2009).

In contrast with the findings of Moorman and Rust (1999), Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) find that there is no direct relationship between marketing influence and business performance. Their explanation for this finding is that because of the wide adoption of the marketing concept across multiple departments, the incremental value for the performance of a strong marketing department is less clear. However, because the marketing’s department

influence is related to market orientation, which is related to performance, Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) suggest that an influential marketing department will still be beneficial for organizations. In addition Argyriou et al. (2009) mentioned that if top managers support the marketing function, marketing can add value in the market place and the marketing

department can be the facilitator that helps the whole organization to become more market orientated organization.

To earn the respect of the top management and to let the marketing department play an influential role in the marketing decision area, the marketing department and therefore the marketing specialists that work in that department should require a number of specific capabilities (Morgan, 2011). Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) determined in their conceptual model that the following capabilities: accountability, innovativeness, customer connection and integration/cooperation with other departments are antecedents of the marketing departments influence and for that reason the importance of the marketing function in today’s organizations.

Accountability. As mentioned in the previous paragraph accountability also plays a role in the importance of marketing thought but also with regard to the marketing function where it can be seen as a capability. The importance of this capability is generally acknowledged ( e.g. Lehman, 2004; Rust et al., 2004) and there is a proven positive relation between the accountability and the marketing departments influence (e.g. Moorman & Rust, 1999; Verhoef & leeflang 2009; Verhoef et al., 2011).

Innovativeness. Sirvastava et al. (1999) determined that product development / innovation is one of the core processes that contribute to the delivering customer value. In the study of Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) innovativeness is defined as the degree to which marketing contributes to the developed new products within the firm and has a positive relationship with the influence of the marketing department.

13 Customer connection. This means representing the customer to the company. Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) suggested that within organization it is not always clear who’s responsible for the relationship with its customer. The competence of the marketer related to this capability is the ability to link the focal offer to the firm customer need. In both studies of Verhoef & Leeflang they did not find a positive relationship between the customer

connecting capabilities and the influence of the marketing department. However Argyriou et al. (2009) mentioned that senior management is impressed by marketing’s ability to keep close to the customers. Besides that it is not just being close to the customer that really matters, but the ability to translate the ensuring customer awareness into marketable opportunities. To transform customer needs into technical specifications, new products or services. Although marketing seems to be everywhere, and the marketing department is no longer the solely owner of the customer in the firm. Marketers still need to care about the customer. (Webster, et al., 2005).

Creativity The ability to come up with new and creative marketing programs, this differs from innovativeness; creativity pertains to how marketing (communication) programs (i.e. positioning, branding and promotions) deviate from common practice, while innovativeness pertains to the marketing departments contribution to new product/service development. The studies of Verhoef et al. (2009; 2011) expected that creativity was positively related with marketing’s influence. Both studies did not show strong evidence for this relationship. They suggested that the reason for this finding was that creativity is much more difficult to assess than for instance accountability and innovativeness. Creativity is much more

“intangible”.

However Argyriou et al. (2009) suggest that if marketing wants to gain success and recognition, marketers need to engage both side of the brain: the left hemisphere for the sequential and analytical processes necessary for accountability and the holistic and

intuitive strengths of the right hemisphere that help creative marketing. Argyrio et al. 2009 also stated that top management regularly mention the fact that marketing campaigns often lack excitement and originality.

Integration/cooperation: In the marketing decision making, other functions like Sales, R&D, Operations and Finance, besides marketing play an important role (Homburg et al., 1999). Studies that investigated the cooperation between marketing and these functions came to the general conclusion that more cooperation is considered beneficial for a firm and leads to better performance (e.g. Srivastava et al. 1999). According to Kumar (2015) this integrative approach even is the latest emerging paradigm for marketing. He suggests that marketing should be at the helm, and therefore be an integral part of the organization’s decision-making frame work. This calls for a complete integration of marketing activities with other business functions.

So the importance of the marketing function can be established by looking at the presence and location of the marketing department and the associated capabilities of the marketing department. As well as by viewing the influence of marketing in the different marketing decision areas i.e. marketing activities. This latter topic will be addressed in paragraph 2.3.

14

2.2.3. The shift in importance of the marketing function.

With regard to the shift in importance of the marketing function the following observations can be made.

Accountability. In 2005, Webster et al. suggests that if the marketing function wants to regain its “seat at the table” marketing should resolve their ongoing debate about their productivity. Marketing management should have access to the right metrics that make a distinction between long term and short term goals (see 2.1) and they should be able to work with these metrics. Almost ten years later, Klaus et al. (2014) stated that if marketing what to get back on the CEO’s agenda it has to face its lack of financial accountability. Kumar (2015) also stated that marketing accountability was a prominent theme in academic research and that the marketing function has become elevated alongside other business functions with respect to accountability and performance. Taking this together it suggest that accountability also plays a vital role in the importance of the marketing function. It appears that marketing is trying but seems not quite capable to resolve this continuous ongoing debate with regard to accountability. If marketing does not come up with a solution, in all probability, this will lead to a decline in the importance of the marketing function.

Integration/cooperation. Because of the thought that whole organizations should be more market oriented and credos like: “everybody should be a part-time marketer” led to diffusion in marketing thinking in organizations (Brown, 2005). An effect is that marketing has a less prominent place and other department/functions take over the role of marketing (Frambach & Leeflang, 2009). De Swaan et al. (2014) even suggests that “marketing” is no longer a discrete entity but now extends throughout the firm and tapping virtually on every other function in an organization.

In the integration/cooperation discussion of marketing with other functions, the distinction between the marketing and the sales function was a trending topic in research for quite some time. Argyriou et al. (2009) suggest that market orientation and corporate

performance will improve because of marketing’s influence across the firm and not just sales.

A fast majority of researchers seem to have found a general consensus that if marketing and sales must be viewed as two different functional groups, to achieve marketing’s true

potential. If marketing is all the same, deployed as sales support activity, it will lack the necessary strength to stick up for the customers across the firm or to influence the organizations strategy (e.g. Webster, 1992; Homburg, et al., 2000; Krohmer, et al., 2002; Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009; Argyriou et al. 2009).

According to the studies of Verhoef et al. (2009; 2011) it is unclear which effect the integration of the marketing function with other functions, besides the sales function, has on the actual influence of the marketing function. They suggested that on the one hand more cooperation could increase influence because it prevents marketing from becoming an uninfluential separate entity. On the other hand more cooperation may cause the loss of sovereignty in marketing decision making and create further dispersion of marketing’s

15 responsibilities with its concomitant loss of influence. However their results suggest that top managers appreciate a cooperation between the finance and marketing function.

Kumar (2015) however stated that the customer focused marketing approach provided a definitive direction for marketing, thereby placing it at the crossroads besides finance and accounting with technology and operations. And that in the emerging paradigm marketing activities are becoming integrated with these other business functions.

Based on the above observations the assumption can be made that it is important that marketing and sales must be viewed as two separate function, but marketing can no longer ignore that it must integrate and cooperate with other business functions. What is less obvious is the consequence is of this integration/cooperation with regard to the importance of the marketing function? Nevertheless it is not conclusive that the marketing function is losing its importance.

2.3 Marketing as a set of specific activities.

2.3.1 Marketing activities

Over time marketing activities have changed and become more fragmented and specialized. For instance in 1989 McKee et al. defined nine marketing activities: marketing scanning, product development, pricing analysis, distribution intensity, advertising, screening and support of customer contact personnel, political activity. Ten years later Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) mentioned eleven marketing decision areas. Four remained the same: advertising, pricing, distribution and product development, political activity vanished and the other activities were renamed or were added to the list: Relationship and loyalty programs, customer service, strategy, expansion to foreign markets and investments in information technology. In the CMO survey, a survey that collects twice a year the opinion of top marketers in the USA, use nineteen different activities, see table 1 in paragraph 2.3.3. According to Deshpandé et al. (1993) marketing activities are being executed on four

different levels. First, marketing can play an important role in the organizational culture. Second, marketing can play a crucial part in the information provision within organizations. Third, marketing activities can be distinguished on a strategic level to realize a sustainable competitive advantage. And finally marketing activities are executed on a tactical level, these are the activities that contribute to being successful within existing product-market combinations.

2.3.2 The importance of marketing activities

The level of an organizational culture. An example of the first level is an organization were the added value for customers plays a central role in all functions. This corresponds with the marketing thought as described in paragraph 2.1 therefore no further attention will be paid to this level in this paragraph.

The level of information provision. When organizations became market oriented, they characterized themselves by collecting and distributing information in a systematic manner and by reacting on this info in a responsive and a proactive way (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990) (Frambach & Leeflang, 2009). Jaworski & Kohli (1996) suggested that a market oriented

16 organization should have an organization wide generation, internal dissemination and should respond to the marketing intelligence to pertain customers, competitors and forces that affect them. Marketing activities that can be assumed to be related to this are for instance market research and marketing analytics. Market research is objectively and systematically collecting information from specific markets or customer in order to get insights and make funded decisions (Kooiker, Broekhoff, & Stumpel, 2011). The processing, dissemination and responding to this information is often called marketing intelligence within organizations (Jaworski & Kohli, 1996).

The digital revolution, which is in progress, creates tremendous new challenges for

marketing (Leeflang, Verhoef, Dahlstrom, & Freundt, 2014). One of these challenges which is formulated by CMO’s in the IBM study of 2011 is the explosion of data, sometimes also called big data. Because of this data firms can generate and leverage deeper customer insights. It appears that companies, which systematically analyze data are said to

distinguishes themselves from and outperform their competitors (e.g. Davenport, 2006; Leeflang, et al., 2014; De Swaan, et al., 2014). Concerning this development, with regard to the importance of marketing, marketing should be a held responsibility for activities as market research, marketing analytics, and marketing intelligence.

The level of marketing strategy. In order for organizations to survive they need a strategy to compete with their competitors. A competitive strategy of an organization is about being different and satisfying customers with a distinct value (Poter, 1996) and strategic marketing is about creating this sustainable value for customers. It is about defining the right value proposition for the right people in order to attract, keep and let customers grow and thereby create customer equity and improve the market and financial performance ( e.g. Rust et al., 2004; Morgan, 2011).

According to Rust et al. (2004) value, brand and relationship equity lead to customer equity. Marketing activities that contribute in the creation of value equity are activities as product specifications, development and launching new products, strategy for new markets or distribution/channel (Srivastava, Shervani, & Fahey, 1999) .

With regard to brand equity the activity branding (e.g. Aaker 1997; 2010; 2014) and for the relation equity activities as Customer Relationship Management (CRM) and customer service (e.g. Srivastava et al., 1999). Therefore the assumption can be made that all these activities are strategic by nature.

Because the marketing function is becoming integrated with other business functions (see par 2.2), results in the consequence that marketing loses grip in marketing decision making area. Frambach and Leeflang (2009) suggest that this could be problematic for organizations when marketing only plays a more tactical then a strategically role.

The level of marketing tactics. In academic research the tactical level on which marketing activities are being executed does not get much attention. In this study marketing activities as social media, public relations, lead generation, advertisement, promotional campaigns, price setting and price change are assumed to be tactical by nature.

17

2.3.3 The shift in marketing activities

Twice a year the CMO-survey collects the opinions of top marketers in the USA on for instance who is in the lead regarding marketing responsibilities. Table 1 presents the

compression of the CMO-survey of august 2010 and august 2014, this provides insight in the shift of importance of marketing activities.

Table 1: percentage of companies in which marketing leads activity. *added in feb 2011, ** added in feb 2013 The shift in the level of information provision. In the area of marketing analytics it is interesting to see that this activity is only added as a marketing responsibility in the survey of February 2013. It appears that in a relatively large amount of company’s marketing is in the lead with regards to marketing analytics, 2013: 76%, 2014: 68,3%. Although marketing still has a strong leadership, it is notable that in one and half years, marketing seems to be losing almost ten percent of its leadership.

Beside the fact that marketing research was already recognized as a marketing activity in the CMO survey, the same development with regard to marketing’s leadership can be observed, still a strong leadership, but losing ground seven percent in four years. This seems almost contradictive with the challenges in the digital revolution that marketing is facing see paragraph 2.3.2. Hereby an increase is more in line with expectations than the observed decrease. Therefore the assumption can be made that on the level of information provision the importance of marketing is in decline.

Marketing responsibility CMO survey August 2010 CMO survey August 2014 Influence Brand 78,8 % 84,4 % +/+ Advertising 85 % * 83,9 % -/- Social Media 69,6 % 78,4 % +/+ Positioning 78,6 % 76,9 % -/- Promotion 77,1 % 74,9 % -/- Marketing analytics 76% ** 68,3 % -/- Public Relations 58,1 % 65,8 % +/+ Marketing research 72,3 % 65,3 % -/- Competitive intelligence 62,7 % 57,3 % -/- Lead generation 57,8 % 56,3 % -/-

Market entry strategies 57,2 % 52,3 % -/-

New Products 51,2 % 41,7 % -/- CRM 44,3 % 38,2 % -/- Pricing 35,8 % 32,2 % -/- Target/Market Selection 41,0 % 30,7 % -/- Innovation 33,4 % 30,2 % -/- Sales 37,0 % 26,6 % -/- Customer service 25,0 % 19,6 % -/-

18 The shift in the marketing strategy level. Based on the CMO surveys, it can be observed marketing has a continuous leadership in positioning (2010, 78,6 % versus 2014 76,9 %). This is also suggested by the studies of Verhoef et al. (2009; 2011). They concluded that

marketing dominates marketing decisions made in the following areas segmentation, targeting and positioning, and in relationship and loyalty programs. This last observation seems to be contradictive with the data from the CMO-survey. Although marketing has a relatively large amount of leadership in CRM, Customer Service and target/market selection they all are losing in leadership. For instance within four years, CRM and Customer Service have lost approximately 5% of their leadership and target/market selection has lost even more than 10% of its influence.

In the CMO-surveys it appears that marketing has a relatively strong leadership in relation to branding and it suggest to become even stronger over time (2010 almost 79% versus a large 84% in 2014). The opposite seems to true from the new product development area, in this area marketing seems to be losing its leadership, a decline of 10% within four years. While in the innovation area marketing seems to have a relatively continuous relationship.

Based on the previous observations with regard to the activities on the strategy level, it turn out that it cannot unambiguously be established that marketing is losing its importance in this area, because within some activities marketing gains leadership while in other area’s it is clearly in decline.

The shift on the tactical level. On the tactical level the most interesting shift can be observed with regard to advertisement and social media. From the CMO-survey’s it becomes clear that over the years marketing has a strong leadership in advertisement around the 85%. This is also suggested the studies of Verhoef et al. (2009; 2011).

Beside the challenge of big data as mentioned in the level of information provision, social media is also defined as big challenge by the CMO’s in the IBM study of 2011. Therefore it is interesting to see that in the CMO-survey marketing has developed a strong leadership in this area and that is appears this seems to be increasing (69,6 % in 2010 versus 78,4 % in 2014). This perhaps indicated that the only area where marketing is thoroughly in control and realizes it’s through importance is on this tactical level.

2.4 Conclusion of the literature review

The findings of this literature study provide insight in the importance of marketing within today’s organizations. It becomes clear that the importance of marketing is shifting and that the direction is not unequivocal. So to make the assumption that marketing is losing its importance seems to be to short-sighted. It appears that the change in importance differs on the three general levels of thought, function and activities.

The marketing thought. With regard to the marketing thought it seems that in the board rooms CMO’s are gaining influence and that the vast majority of organizations seem to be focusing on the customer. The customer is seen as the biggest responsibility of marketing. This leads to the assumption that from this angle marketing is not in decline but perhaps is

19 gaining importance. Another key point with regard to the importance of the marketing thought is the observation that marketing should still bring more accountability to their actions. If this is accomplished it will contribute in the long term perspective on marketing. This subsequently will increase the importance of marketing. However, the call for

accountability sounds for years and it’s therefore interesting to see what the current state of affairs is in organizations.

The marketing function. Capabilities are antecedents for the influence of the marketing department. For that reason also for the importance of the marketing function. The shift in importance in the capabilities can be observed in the areas of accountability and

integration/cooperation. With regard to accountability the same assumption can be made as on the thought level. Marketing seems not capable to resolve this ongoing debate and it is therefore interesting to study how today organizations deal with this topic and what is thoroughly accomplished in this area.

Another shift that can be observed is the one regarding the integration/ cooperation with other functions. From the literature can be established that marketing and sales must be seen as two separate function and that it cannot be ignored that marketing must integrate and cooperate with other functions. But it is not conclusive that because of this integration/ cooperation the importance of marketing is in decline, so this seems worth studying.

Marketing activities. On the level of information provision it appears that marketing still has a relatively strong leadership, but is losing ground. Based on the challenges for marketing that appear because of the digital revolution this almost seems contradictive. So it appears interesting to determine if marketing is truly losing ground here and that the importance of marketing is in decline.

Regarding the activities on the strategy level it appears that marketing has a strong continuous leadership in positioning, branding and innovation. While in other areas, as CRM, Customer service and target/market selection marketing is losing importance. Because of this whimsical image it is a wordy item for further research.

A different image emerges on the tactical level. It is interesting to observe that relatively and continuously marketing has a strong leadership in activities as advertisement and in Social Media. This perhaps indicates that this the only area where marketing is truly in control and realizes it’s true importance. Nevertheless Frambach & Leeflang (2009)

suggested that it could be problematic for marketing if it only plays a tactical role instead of a strategically one. So how does organization look as this development, is this a decline for the importance of marketing?

20

3. Research Method

3.1. Description of the method

This study is exploratory and cross sectional by nature because the objective is to seek new insights, to ask questions and to assess the complex and multi-faceted phenomena of marketing (Saunder, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012). It will provide insight into and supply a fuller understanding of the importance of marketing within organizations.

As set in the previous chapter, the importance of marketing is shifting. And therefore it is needed to get a more in-depth understanding of the dynamics present in today’s

organization. In order to get a better in depth-understanding, a qualitative research is an appropriate research method (Mortelmans, 2009). Therefore in this study a qualitative survey is conducted and will mainly rely on the results of these interviews.

In conducting the research four research methods are applied: literature review, interviews with experts, interviews with top managers in organizations and a document study.

The literature review gives the theoretical background on the topic of this study. Then interviews with experts were conducted. The set up for these interviews was face-to-face and had an open structure. Sequent, the literature review and the expert interviews were used to draft the guideline for the interviews with the respondents (see appendix 2). 3.2 Interviews with experts

The literature on the role marketing plays within organization is extensive, complicated and not unequivocal. Therefore the researcher set up interviews with three experts. With these interviews the researcher wanted to enrich the knowledge on the role of marketing and find out which are important developments related to the role of marketing within organizations according to these experts. The experts were selected based on the fact they have already information and/or experience with regard to the subject and may even have formed an opinion on the matter. The first expert was the director of a customer research agency and a lecturer within the executive program of the UvA. The second expert was a Professor of a Dutch University who performed extensive research in the marketing area. The third expert was an executive account director from an advertisement agency. The names of the experts are known by the researcher. The interviews were conducted in November 2014, were face-to-face, had an open structure and lasted between 33 and 72 minutes.

21 3.3 Sample selection.

In the period of November 2014 and January 2015, fifteen top managers (N= 15) within ten different organizations were interviewed. These managers were reached by oriented trekking and snowball recruiting (Rubin & Rubin, 1995).

The respondents and their function at time of the interview took place are listed in the table below. The names of respondents can be obtained from the researcher.

Organization Respondents

1 Ahold  Chief Commercial Officer, Executive board

2 Arcadis  Director Client Development Netherlands

3 Barenbrug  Head of Sales & Marketing

 Marketing manager

4 FrieslandCampina  Corporate director global categories/CMO consumer products

5 Inshared  Manager Legal

 Manager portfolio & actuarial

 Founder, Managing partner 6 MSD Animal Health  General Manager

 Manger customer & business support

7 Nuon  Head of consumer market management

8 Procter and Gamble  Marketing director Netherlands, Belgium and France

9 Randstad  Marketing director Netherlands

10 Wavin  Country Director Netherlands

 Finance Director North West Europe

Table 2. Sample selection

To get a broader perspective on the phenomenon of marketing, respondents were selected with different responsibilities, not just with a responsibility in the marketing area.

There are an equal amount of B2B and B2C organizations in the sample, however the organizations differ in terms of products/services and size but they all have a leading position in the field of marketing.

3.3 Research techniques.

Primary and secondary sources of data are used in this study. The secondary data were retrieved from the organizations, including company’s presentations, drawings respondents made, and the internet. The primary source of data were semi-structured interviews

because the researcher sought to approach the world of marketing from the subject’s perspective (Berg & Lune, 2012).

The fifteen interviews were conducted in a period of three months, including one double interview, all by the same interviewer. Two interviews were conducted by telephone, the other interviews were conducted on the location of the respondent’s organization. The interviews were held in Dutch and recorded on tape with permission of the respondents,

22 except for the interview that were conducted by telephone, thereby the interviewer made notes.

After a short introduction the researcher proceeded by asking the open questions on the role of marketing from the interview guide. During the interview the researcher summarized and placed in-depth questions to the answers of the respondents. Sometimes, because of the informal setting the items from the guideline were discussed in a different order and also other items were discussed. The interviews lasted between 40 and 70 minutes. All of the recorded interviews were processed into word-for-word transcripts with a total of 295 pages. One recording had too much background noise, and therefore not word-for-word transcribed. The transcripts will be provided in a separate PFD-file.

The outcomes of the interviews form the base for the results in the next chapter. All of the quotes are made anonymous.

3.4 Data analysis.

The data analysis started after a couple of interviews were completed. The first order of all of this information is done according to the ordering in information units (Baarda, 2009) based on the themes which were defined by the literature review. Some fragments were labeled as irrelevant because they did not contribute in the answering of the research question, for example the repeating of the interviewer. Following case study analysis procedures, multiple levels of coding were used. The coding process started with open coding and axial (Mortelmans, 2009). In the coding process the qualitative data analysis software QSR NIVIVO 10.0 was used. An example of the coding scheme can be found in appendix 2.

In the analysis of the interviews the theory was tested by the amount of the answers and thick and rich descriptions of the answers.

23

4. Results

4.1 The experts

The interviews with the selected experts had an open character and were conceded to define what experts observe in today’s practice, with regard to the role marketing fulfills in organizations. These interviews contributed empirical evidence and knowledge to the findings from the published literature. Since their different expertise, each of the experts had his own view point and they all emphasized on different aspects of the role of marketing in today’s organizations.

4.1.1 The marketing thought.

For realizing the marketing thought throughout an organization, top management plays an important role. With regard to the fact if there needs to be a CMO present the experts were not unanimous. However all three experts made statements, with regard to the role of marketing within organizations and that marketing leadership at the highest level in an organization is an important starting point, with regard to the importance of marketing. From theory is becomes clear that marketing should be about the long term, while many managers have a strong focus on the short term financial metrics, This is also signaled by the experts as an important issue. One of the experts stated “if the economy pics up, this creates space for thinking and long term vision, then marketing will rise again.” Another expert said that if managers are brought up with Excel and spreadsheets, marketing gets skewed and it has become all about the short term.

The first quote also suggests that the economic conjuncture has an influence on the role of marketing. Another expert mentioned that the changing role of marketing is caused by the rapid changing markets and the fact that competitors come from new angles. These

developments make it hard for organizations to stay focused on the long term and therefore have an influence on the role marketing fulfills.

Closely related to this short termism is the use of the right metrics, which was mentioned by all three experts. One of the experts elaborated on the link between the marketing thought and the use of the right metrics. He mentioned that the whole organization should be customer focused and this stands or falls by the use of the right metrics throughout the organizations. According to this expert the most important metrics that represent this thought are employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction and financial results. This is illustrated by the following quotes:

“It stands or falls by which metrics, which measurements are important within an organization.”

“There are a few metrics which are important, employees, customers, finance… and perhaps innovation, if you are a product leader”.

24

Conclusion: Based on the observations of the experts it becomes clear that the importance of the marketing thought within organizations is influenced by external factors (e.g. the economic conjuncture, new competitors). If the economy improves, for example, the importance of marketing will increase because organizations get a more long term focus which is good for the marketing thought in an organization..

They also indicated that the marketing thought is flourishing in organizations with a strong leadership in marketing and where the “right” metrics are used. This last observation seems to be in line with the call for accountability in the academic literature.

4.1.2. The marketing function

One expert made the observation that organizations tend to hire external agencies to make their value propositions for them. This hiring of external agencies can be interpreted in two ways; first the importance of marketing is increasing and therefore external experts are hired or second marketing is less important and therefore it is outsourced. Based on the added remarks it becomes clear that according to the expert, there is a lot of bureaucracy within organizations and almost nobody is talking to the customer anymore. And because organizations have lost their clear focus, this results in the fact that they cannot make their own propositions and that is why they have to hire externals for this job. This indicates that marketing is losing ground.

Another issue, according to two experts, is the distinction between marketing and sales function within organizations. It seems that marketing in organizations is counteracted by sales, because in many organizations sales knows more about the customer and marketing more about the product and this should be the other way around. One of the experts mentioned that sales does not even have the right capabilities to fulfill the marketing function e.g. ”Only the point is that sales is closer to the customer, but with regard to the analytical ability, capabilities…they do not have it”.

A different observation made by an expert is that because of the rapid changing world, the needs of the customers are becoming more unpredictable and innovations succeed one another in rapid tempo. This results in the fact that on the short term sales must close the deal, otherwise the products in stock will be out of date and no sale is made. Therefore in multiple organizations sales gets a more prominent position then marketing.

One of the experts made the statement that if marketing wants to return, which implicated that marketing function is in decline, it should anticipate on new developments and give content to their activities from a staff-like position, more than from a line-position, where most marketing functions are positioned.

Conclusion: The experts observed that the marketing function is losing ground, particularly in the area where the marketing function crosses the sales function. If marketing wants to accomplish its full prosperity, marketing must ensure that it is organized as a staff-function. According one of the experts this differs from the current state in most organizations. Now-a-days marketing is mainly organized as a line/business unit function and so it seems that marketing is not seen as very important, because it is not organized in the best possible way.

25

4.1.3 The marketing activities

One expert observed that organizations are struggling with three major developments; first social media/ digital marketing, second the channel problem regarding the online/offline questions and the individualization that requires more unique products. The technology of social media was also mentioned by another expert. In all three areas marketing should require leadership, according to all the experts.

The following quote is made by one of the expert “We have here on a small scale, a

marketing manager, but if you ask him what are you responsible for? Product?” “ Mmm no.” “Price? “ “Mmmm no. “ “Place? “ “Mmm no.” “Promotion?” “Yes!” “So I think this

degeneration is happening in a lot of organization.” In line with this quote another expert mentioned that the marketing department’s only responsibility is in the promotion and branding area.

Conclusion: Based on the observations of the experts on the marketing activity level, they perceive that marketing is degraded to a more executive and tactical level. And that

marketing seems to be struggling with the developments in the digital area, for instance its leadership in social media.

4.1.3 Conclusion of the experts

Based on the interviews with the experts it again becomes clear that no overall statement can be made about the fact if marketing is losing importance. On the three general levels the following can be concluded.

Marketing thought. On the marketing thought level, according to the experts the importance of marketing is influenced by external factors. If for instance the economy improves, the importance of marketing will also increase because organizations get a more long term focus and that is beneficiary for the importance of the marketing thought. The experts also indicated that the marketing thought will flourish in organizations where there is a strong leadership in marketing and where the “right” metrics are used. This last observation is in line with the call for accountability in the academic literature.

Marketing function. With regard to the level of the marketing function the experts observed a loss of importance, particularly in the area where the marketing crosses the sales function. Another observation by the experts is that in many organizations the marketing function is not organized in the best possible way and therefore is losing importance.

Marketing activities. On the level of marketing activities the experts suggested marketing is degraded to an executive and tactical level and that marketing is struggling with its

leadership in the developments in the digital area. Both signals indicate that marketing is losing its importance on this level.

26 4.2 The Respondents

4.2.1 Definition of marketing

Webster et al. (2005) suggested that the definition of marketing tends to be person specific. Therefore the researcher began the interviews with a consideration of the meaning of marketing. A third of the interviewees expressed that they found it hard defining marketing. One of the respondents stated that it is difficult to give a definition of marketing, because it is facing an enormous change. For other quotations that illustrate that it appears to be difficult to define marketing, see table 3.

First reaction to the question: What does marketing mean to you?

“That is a very beautiful container question.” “That's a tough one, it is a very broad term.” “Mhh so what is marketing? …..”

“Perhaps you better could say what marketing is not.” “That has been a subject of change”.

Table 3: Marketing is hard to define

These reactions indicate that it seems to be important to determine if marketing is

discussed, what the definition of marketing is. As mentioned in the literature review in this study marketing is disaggregated on the three general levels.

4.2.2 The marketing thought.

In all ten organizations that participated in this study, marketing was being represented in the top management team of the organization.

Beside this representation of marketing on a high level, the background of the respondents plays a part in their opinion/understanding of marketing and therefore has influence on the importance of the marketing thought (e.g. Homburg et al., 1999).

One of the respondents even made the following noteworthy statement that confirms this theory: “Our CEO has a sales and marketing background. That people in those places have this background, means something. We made a choice in our organization, that people who are higher in the organization, have a background in marketing and sales. These people have a drive, a business drive.”

Overall the educational background of the respondents is quite diverse, some of them even followed multiple studies, see figure 1. Notable is that only one of the fifteen respondents had an actual educational background in Marketing with regards to the professional background more marketing and sales experience is shown, again some respondents have multiple background experience, see figure 2.

27

Figure 1: educational background of respondent

Figure 2: Professional background of respondents

From theory it became clear that the core of the marketing thought is about focusing on the customer and that marketing will flourish within organizations where marketing has a long term focus.

After the initial reaction mentioned in 4.2.1, the respondents gave a substantive response, see appendix 3 for quotes. The majority of respondents replied that marketing has

something to do with the customer. An illustrative quote is: “Put the customer at the center. To do

as much as possible to delight him or her”.

See for a summary of the results figure 3 and for all the quotations see appendix 3.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Marketing Economics Management studies Others # r es p o n d ets Educational background 0 1 2 3 # r es p o n d en ts Professional background

28

Figure 3: reactions on marketing thought

Customer focus: Within almost all organizations (nine out of ten) it turned out that the marketing thought within their organization is about the customer. In one organization it became clear that they were more product than customer oriented e. g “If you want to sell

innovation, then you have to do something about marketing”. The results confirm the statements of

Verhoef and Leeflang (2009; 2011) that most organizations have become customer centric. Remarkably is that the customer is a trending topic in relation to the marketing thought, however when the respondents were asked what the topics were they discussed in their board meetings, only six out of ten organizations mentioned the customer or customer related topics as the most important and most time-consuming items. This seems to be contradictive with the results for the question regarding the marketing thought. See appendix 3 for quotes on topics discussed during a board meeting.

Long term focus: The respondents elaborated on the fact that the marketing thought contributes in their organizations to the following: branding (N=4), innovation (N=4),

positioning (N=4). Some mentioned that marketing has multiple contributions. Linking these results to the theory these contributions can be seen as long term focus.

Interesting is the fact that in one organization (B2C) brand management is seen as marketing, and that in one other organization the respondent (B2B) explicitly mentioned that brand management is not the same as marketing.

Only the two respondents, with a background in finance, elaborated explicitly on the item short-termism. They both acknowledged that marketing is often seen as costs, while it should be seen as a “long term” investment. “Because when you talk about financial accounting rules it are costs. But those costs are made to accomplish something, you are busy building a company and then I always call it an investment”.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Customer focus Long term focus strategy

Long term focus investment # O rgan iza tio n s