Advertising Age ran an article about the “expanding role” of the CMO. As you might expect, this article got my attention. Unfortunately, I was again stunned by what CMOs must have thought their jobs were before because the article’s definition of expansion seems like a big “duh” to me.
As an example, the article states: In fact, industry watchers say today’s CMO must become the de-facto chief customer officer — or lose out. “CMOs have historically been the brand steward. This is an opportunity to be a customer steward,” Mr. Frankland said. “If they don’t do it, someone else will.” Seriously, who else could possible be the CCO? The VP of Sales? Maybe, as they get accused of being on the “customer’s side,” but really…?
The article suggests perhaps a new position would need to be created. Seriously? How about you just make the CMO responsible for MARKETING and not just branding or promotion or other limited functions?
Once you realize that the true role of Marketing is to align the capabilities of your company with the current and future needs of your customers, this whole article becomes unnecessary.
Mitch
Thanks for your comments. I agree, marketing should naturally align with the customer, customer touchpoints and all communication. I’ve wanted Marketing to “get” customer experience for a long time now. I’m a marketer who has fully embraced CX and hope all marketers can.