Part 5: People vs. Process

This is the fifth part of a series on Sustainable Marketing. In this installment we continue the comparison of Traditional Marketing (People) versus Sustainable Marketing (Process). Click here to link to the beginning (Part 1) of the series .

In many small companies, lead volume is tracked by Mary. Cost per lead is determined by Bob. Someone “on the fifth floor” consolidates the pipeline report. In larger companies, these forenames are simply replaced by department names. Marketing communications tracks leads. Sales operations develops the forecast.

Companies frequently have well-defined processes and workflows in manufacturing, customer support, and finance, but too often the same cannot be said of marketing. Processes that are well documented are candidates for continuous measurement, automation, and improvement. Here marketing is often well behind other disciplines.

The lack of standard processes in marketing makes sustainable progress difficult. What cannot be defined cannot be measured and improved. One thing that rapidly becomes apparent from this discussion is that sustainable marketing involves phased investments managed consistently over time. “Sustainable marketing” describes a process, not a discrete event or achievable state.

We have written about the value of continual improvement for more than a decade. This concept is well known, primarily on the supply side of the corporate value chain and most notably in process control and quality assurance. The approach became popular in the 1980s and 1990s as part of a major restructuring of business in many countries as a response to gains made by the Japanese automobile and electronics industries. The overall approach is older, dating to the 1930s and 1940s.

The Deming-Shewhart Cycle of Continual Improvement is the result of work done by Dr. W. Edwards Deming and Dr. Walter Shewhart. The four-step process (PDSA) is simple, but compelling in practice:

• Plan: Determine the scope of the test as well as the planned interval of iteration

• Do: Try out the test on a small scale

• Study: Gather empirical evidence and study the results (involve the customer if possible)

• Act: Take action to improve the process based on what was learned from the test

This model is part of a large body of statistical work on improving quality. It has spawned a host of “quality circles” and “six sigma” initiatives. Six Sigma uses a modified version summarized by the acronym DMAIC: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control.

Quality has become an objective, a philosophy, way of life, and a major organizing principle in manufacturing organizations worldwide. In corporate IT departments, the idea has gained significant traction, as much from experience as from theory. Long, serial development processes have given way to continual prototyping with phased deliverables.

Most IT professionals have emotional (if not physical) scars from the big bang approach to systems development. The approach has not, however, found its way easily into the demand side of the value chain. Sales and marketing executives are driven by quarterly results. They live on the front lines, and their tenure can be short. The notion of a long journey of continual improvement resonates only with the few.

In an age of sustainable marketing, this must change. Companies simply cannot risk big surprises and large failures. They require the ability to plan big and start small as a way to contain risk. To be more sustainable, marketing organizations must focus on implementing and improving processes by creating a culture of quality.