Teugels has articulated something that's been gnawing at many of us—that uncomfortable gap between what marketing *claims* to be and what it's actually *doing* in most organizations.
The "lowest barrier to entry, highest volume of opinion" observation particularly stings because it's so accurate. When everyone with a social media account considers themselves a marketer, and when "going viral" becomes the north star, we've confused **distribution** with **strategy** and **visibility** with **value**.
What strikes me most is the phrase "executive vanity production arm." It captures how marketing has been demoted from market-sensing strategic function to internal service department—existing primarily to make the C-suite feel good about themselves rather than to deeply understand and serve actual customers.
The question now: how do we restore marketing as a discipline? Is it about better education, different hiring criteria, boardroom courage, or all three?
David,
Teugels has articulated something that's been gnawing at many of us—that uncomfortable gap between what marketing *claims* to be and what it's actually *doing* in most organizations.
The "lowest barrier to entry, highest volume of opinion" observation particularly stings because it's so accurate. When everyone with a social media account considers themselves a marketer, and when "going viral" becomes the north star, we've confused **distribution** with **strategy** and **visibility** with **value**.
What strikes me most is the phrase "executive vanity production arm." It captures how marketing has been demoted from market-sensing strategic function to internal service department—existing primarily to make the C-suite feel good about themselves rather than to deeply understand and serve actual customers.
The question now: how do we restore marketing as a discipline? Is it about better education, different hiring criteria, boardroom courage, or all three?
Looking forward to Part 2.
I think you're absolutely right, John. And very well put. Thanks.