Memo To The Ceo: Do Not Turn Off The Marketing Tap

Find a creative way to maintain flows into your mission critical marketing assets, in the face of exogenous shocks.

Marketing is a discretionary profit and loss statement item, one of the first to go, in tough times in most companies. In most firms and geographic markets, the marketing budget co-varies with economic activity and/or company fortunes. In other words, marketing budgets, generally go up or down, in line with economic activity and/or company performance1.

Unfortunately though, to remain in the game or to retain a winning position, in good or bad times, the business or brand franchise must be strong enough hang onto, grow or bounce back grow pre-exogenous shock Customer Lifetime Values (CLV). Since CLV activity is realized through and facilitated by off balance sheet, intermediate brand related intangible assets such as; prompted or unprompted awareness, confidence, trust and interest etc., and also that all assets, intangible or otherwise, depreciate (not in the accounting sense) over time or are subject to normal wear and tear, these marketing assets need to be maintained or upgraded in good or bad times. Net, some level of re-investment needs to be maintained, regardless.

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, its rapid diffusion across the world as well as the almost uniform national policy responses to manage the spread and gear up health systems for the pandemic, most countries instituted social distancing and varying forms of lock-down. As a consequence of this, economic activities in consumer discretionary GCIS industry sectors and categories as well as some categories within the industrials sector, were halted whilst some essential GICS sectors were left either fully or partially open. As a result of this, most firms in most industry groups and categories were caught between a rock and hard place. On the one hand, demand side activity and revenue dried up or reduced, whilst on the other hand, they continued to incur expenses (COGS, operating expenses and financial expenses).

Faced with the above situation, some firms, especially those with high asset betas were left with no choice, but to de-leverage their operational load factors. Since the marketing budget, a part of SG&A, is largely a discretionary item, some firms switched off their marketing activities altogether whilst waiting for some signals to ascertain whether the second wave will materialize and what the policy response will be. There is no guarantee however, that the off balance sheet, and intermediate intangible assets that facilitate customer and consumer activity will stand still during this “wait and see” period. As the saying goes, nature abhors a vacuum and during a business franchise’s absence, something may pop up and fill the space, especially during this time when consumers are dealing with their health, economic and social anxieties, fears and uncertainties.

The reality is that volatility, ambiguity and uncertainty induced by combinations of exogenous factors acting in concert, are now becoming a new normal, as Darwinian patterns of change (stable periods followed by small or incremental variations over long periods resulting in something new) either give way to or live side with punctuated equilibrium (stable periods followed by rapid bursts of change) as well as, technological change at an industry level that follow what Tushman and Rosenkopf referred to as an era of incremental change, followed by and era of ferment and then a dominant design.

Indications from “rapid bursts” of exogenous and industry level shocks as well as firms’ attempts to adapt to these shocks, suggest that most GICS industry sectors, categories and stocks/firms are now in an era of ferment. At some point however, industry sectors and stocks/companies will emerge with a fit for purpose “dominant design,” whether that be in the form of a new business or operating model, with some elements of either being reinforced and others being reoriented.

Net, instead of switching of the tap altogether, marketing should find innovative ways to maintain optimal flows to keep the mission critical “marketing assets” alive and current. This is more so that the lock-downs and the slews of health related pre-cautions temporarily changed customers and consumers’ established habits and practices. Your business franchise absence could reinforce the new habits and practices that consumers picked during the lock down period.

In addition to the above, the business case to find innovative ways to maintain flows into mission critical marketing assets makes sense. Firstly, since many categories and firms would have cut back on their promotional activities and marketing spend, this means that; 1) there is a strong possibility that it would cost less now than pre-COVID to buy the same exposure; 2) since there is reduced promotional clutter, you may need fewer exposures to break through and be seen or heard; 3) empirical evidence shows a strong link between increased marketing spend and increased market added value during recessions than non-recessionary periods.

Notes

  1. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/coronavirus-advertising-marketing-covid19-pandemic-business/ (Date accessed, 02 July 2020).

References

  1. Samli, A. (2006). Surviving in Chaotic Modern Markets: Strategic Considerations in Turbulent Times. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,14(4), 315-322. Retrieved July 1, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/40470905
  2. Day, G. (2011). Closing the Marketing Capabilities Gap. Journal of Marketing,75(4), 183-195. Retrieved July 1, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/41228619
  3. Harrigan, K. (1980). Strategy Formulation in Declining Industries. The Academy of Management Review,5(4), 599-604. Retrieved July 1, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/257465
  4. Chakravarty, A., & Grewal, R. (2011). The Stock Market in the Driver’s Seat! Implications for R&D and Marketing. Management Science,57(9), 1594-1609. Retrieved July 1, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/41261918
  5. Doherty, N., & Delener, N. (2001). Chaos Theory: Marketing & Management Implications. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,9(4), 66-75. Retrieved July 1, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/40470076
  6. Li, S., & Tallman, S. (2011). MNC Strategies, Exogenous Shocks, And Performance Outcomes. Strategic Management Journal,32(10), 1119-1127. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/27975962
  7. Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. (1994). Organizational Transformation as Punctuated Equilibrium: An Empirical Test. The Academy of Management Journal,37(5), 1141-1166. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/256669
  8. Edeling, A., & Fischer, M. (2016). Marketing’s Impact on Firm Value: Generalizations from a Meta-Analysis. Journal of Marketing Research,53(4), 515-534. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/44134929
  9. Srivastava, R., Shervani, T., & Fahey, L. (1998). Market-Based Assets and Shareholder Value: A Framework for Analysis. Journal of Marketing,62(1), 2-18. doi:10.2307/1251799
  10. Graham, R., & Frankenberger, K. (2011). The Earnings Effects Of Marketing Communication Expenditures During Recessions. Journal of Advertising,40(2), 5-24. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from jstor.org/stable/23048701
  11. Assmus, G., Farley, J., & Lehmann, D. (1984). How Advertising Affects Sales: Meta-Analysis of Econometric Results. Journal of Marketing Research,21(1), 65-74. doi:10.2307/3151793

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *