The one truism that seems to have weathered the downturn and on-again, off-again economic “recovery” is that the globalization of markets will continue at a steady forward pace and, therefore, so must our marketing capabilities to reach them. Just this past week, AdAge even proclaimed that a “tipping point” had been reached in the number of CMOs having a true global scope of responsibility.

Whether or not we are in fact at a watershed moment in global marketing leadership is up for debate, but most of us as marketers can agree that the decades-long trend of expanding into new markets is increasingly set against the backdrop of trying to create a more tightly knit global marketing organization. More and more marketer roles with a pan-geographic focus are surfacing in our conversations with members. Marketing processes are incorporating a more diverse range of inputs from across organizations’ geographic footprint. Resource allocation post-credit crisis tends to be more reflective of countries’ future opportunity versus simply our historical habit of investment.

But amid all of this progress, marketers tell us that they still struggle to see substantial gains in global marketing integration. One member recently commented, “the discussion internally has clearly shifted toward capitalizing on the scale of our international marketing operations but, if anything, it seems that we’re moving further and further apart.”

So, what’s getting in the way? Read More »

As part of our ongoing global marketing organizational structure research, we recently asked MLC members to share some details of their own structures.  In total, 51 members (diverse in industry, size, and global reach) answered the online poll and the results were quite intriguing.  Three key findings emerged from the data – all three of which have been corroborated by more in-depth member conversations: Read More »

Drum roll please… many of you noticed our recent poll asking where we should focus our research efforts in 2011.  Thanks to you (and particular thanks to those who offered up time to talk to us about your areas of interest) we have our major themes of our research for next year: Read More »

Anyone trying to schedule a meeting between New York and Los Angeles knows the three hour time gap can be difficult to work with (not to mention the inherent difference between Type-A Big Apple dwellers and laid back Angelenos).  Now add in New Delhi, London, Shanghai, and Sao Paulo and we’re talking a 16 hour spread to accommodate.  Once you conquer the logistical hurdles, the language and cultural barriers are even more challenging.

Given this, it is not surprising that communication is one of the most frequently cited challenges in our member conversations about structuring and operating a global marketing organization.  The problem exists both between Central Marketing and regional divisions and amongst the divisions themselves. Read More »

By Erin Lynch-Klarup

Opportunities in developing economies are attracting a lot of interest across our membership these days.  Thanks to growth in emerging markets and slowdowns in the US, Europe and Japan, a number of folks we’ve spoken with are expanding their international growth goals.

This focus on markets that were previously on the back burner has triggered questions about how to best organize marketing internationally.  Our conversations with members have revealed a few key tensions every company’s global marketing structure needs to balance:

1. Local Customization vs. Global Consistency: Vesting decision-making power with regional marketing teams through a decentralized org structure allows for greater customization and responsiveness to local conditions.  However this structure can lead to inconsistent branding and variable Marketing quality across regions, as well as unnecessary rework.
2. Budgeting: Global Prioritization vs. Local Accountability: Central budgeting has the benefit of enabling big bets on the best new opportunities.  Alternatively, allocating budget regionally allows for profit and loss accountability at the regional level.  Many companies have opted for accountability in the past, but with greater interest in emerging markets, global investment optimization is becoming a higher priority.
3. Flexibility vs. Continuity & Expertise: Most organizations need some amount of flexibility to respond to new priorities and changing strategies.  At the extreme, a project-based organization is structured around teams that form and dissolve according to shifting priorities.  However, more staid structures with continuity of roles and responsibilities allow for in-depth organization knowledge and expertise.
4. Collaborative Decision Making vs. Organizational Simplicity: A matrix structure with dual or dotted line reporting keeps multiple stakeholders involved in decisions – for better or for worse.  Organizations need to be sure that the benefits of each additional reporting line aren’t outweighed by the loss of agility and costs of coordination.

MLC members, for more on organization structure, check out our archetype org structures and other resources.

By Erin Lynch-Klarup

MLC recently kicked off a project on structuring global marketing organizations.  Over the next few months, our research aims to benchmark members’ current organization structures, and also to provide guidance on ways to overcome common structural challenges and trade-offs.

Getting up to speed on the literature around this topic, I’ve run into a range of takes on organizational structure.  These seem to generally fall into three categories: Read More »

To be a high-tech marketer these days is to have it slightly better than most – small degrees in a recessionary economy, but better nonetheless. Tech companies are outperforming analysts’ earnings estimates as Droids, iPhones, and Torches find thumbs more than willing to take the first step toward carpal tunnel. But how do the best high-tech companies – particularly those in the B2B space – keep positive momentum while douple-dip fears stoke market stagnation? Read More »

We just came back from an innovation session kindly hosted by W.L. Gore and Associates (best known by consumers for the GORE-TEX fabric).  We spent a half day discussing the challenges of pre-funnel product and service innovation, and we were treated to a tour of Gore’s Capabilities Center.

One of the big lessons for me was the importance of organizing for innovation – but not the way you think.  Yes, one of the big questions we hear is about organizational structure, but what became clear during our session was that changing the way you look at your world, including your existing products and services and assumed customer needs, is a critical step to being more creative — even more than how you organize your people. Read More »

By Erin Lynch-Klarup

My colleague Aaron dubbed 2010 “Year of the Re-Org” in January – and the member interest we’ve seen in organizational structure bears this out.  As planning season rolls around, we’ve been examining various org designs.  We’ve identified six archetypes that optimize to different benefits: Read More »

Marketers are awash in data.  Digital, social and (increasingly) mobile marketing are spinning off data streams faster than we can humanly manage.  Analysis-paralysis ensues, and for some of us, data drowning shortly thereafter.

Few marketing organizations today have the analytical chops and creativity to squeeze gamebreaking insight from these increasingly rich data streams (see this prior post on coping with information richness).   Most marketing leaders will settle for a life preserver—they’ll outsource analytics to vendors or shunt it off to an analytics team buried inside of market research.

By contrast, sage marketing leaders will build surfboards to ride the data waves.  How? Read More »