Conference 7.286::digital

    Well, a market is a building or place where merchandise is offered for
    sale.  Similarly, a marketing dept. is infrastructure that's used by
    salespeople.
    
    Mark

    Marketing pulls the customers into the car dealers; selling causes them
    to drive off with new cars.

    Marketing should include everything from market research to a sale -
    and everything in between - advertising, promotion, pricing ...
    
    Sales should be exactly the way it sounds - 1 small part - but the 
    most important part of marketing
    
    The ultimate goal of marketing, the 4 P's or whatever you want to call 
    it is to increase sales.  
    
    Therefore, if marketing is amazing, selling will be simple.
    
    Does this sound like Digital?
    
    Now that marketing will be within each unit, my hope is that it will
    substantially improve.
    
    Marketing should know what customers will want in 3 years and create
    demand for it now.
    
    Sales should know what customers want today and sell as much of it as
    they can. 
    
    Michael

    Here's what I learned in business school that marketing is.
    
    4- Ps (the alliteration is a stretch)
    
    Product.  What will prospects buy?  This task is to define demand
    preferences, segment the general market, identify buying preferences in the
    segments, and specify the product mix that will sell  in the future.
    
    Price.  Estimate demand.  Given the features and market
    segments, and competition, how should a product be priced to maximize
    revenue and profit?
    
    Promotion.  This is a PART of marketing's job, but this is what we
    think marketing is.  This is advertising, free promotion, product
    information, trade shows, etc.
    
    Distribution (I forget the word beginning with p that fit this
    category, but it didn't fit anyway)  How will this product be sold? 
    This is based on the above, and is to arrive at the way to sell a given
    product or service that maximizes profitability.  This answers the
    question, which channel to use for each product.
    
    Those four things are what marketing does in a marketing-oriented
    company.  The product manager is typically in charge, has a business
    background, and makes all four decisions by developing a business plan
    or market plan for the product.  The first P is the most important one. 
    Without that, the others have a strong chance of failure.  
    
    Sales is the execution of part of the marketing plan.  Sales is what
    happens in the channel chosen.  If direct sales is chosen, then the
    company uses a sales force to sell the product, and supports the sales
    force with promotion, a good product, at the right price.  If an
    indirect channel is chosen, then a smaller sales force sells to the
    channel, and pricing and promotion are adjusted to fit the channel.
    
    I can't speak for how this compares with Digital's marketing practice. 
    I've been part of the sales end.
    
    Don Randall

Well, since I appreciated your analogy before, let me offer my
own take on this:

	Marketing is demand creation.
	Sales is demand fulfillment.

Without someone out there drumming up the customers, the sales
people have no one to sell to. In reality, sales people do some
marketing by trying to get their customers to buy more product,
but if marketing was accomplishing its goal, sales wouldn't have
time to do any marketing, they would be busy processing orders.

I see an ad for something at Sears, I don't go looking for the
guy I saw on TV, I go looking for the salesclerk. The salesclerk
needs to be aware of the ad, but doesn't have to do anything
to encourage me to buy.

    >	Marketing is demand creation.
    >	Sales is demand fulfillment.
    
    All right!  This definitely evens the score!  Thanks!
    
    
    Re: the four P's:  I think the fourth P is "Place".  If you're
    starting a restaurant or renting a condo, this is critical.  If
    your business is Internet based, this needs to be redefined to
    mean something like "place in cyberspace", but I have no idea
    what that is....
    
    Re: .1 through .4:  Excellent stuff...  thank you all, and keep
    'em coming!
    
    I note that Pricing is a marketing function.  It seems to me
    that if you set a price, and have a sales forecast based on
    that price, you've got the first piece of the business systems
    needed to run digital like a business:  the revenue forecast.
    
    I have seen (admittedly years ago) pricing of some DEC products
    done like this:  Well our cost is x dollars per unit, and upper
    management is requiring a 40% margin, so I guess that means the
    price has to be 1.666 times X.  I don't know what marketing is,
    but I know this ain't it.  I hope this  doesn't happen any more!
    (I swear I am not making this up!)
    
    Dave
        

    Marketing is more than just demand creation.  It is also demand
    identification.  In other words, the demand may already exist and is
    just waiting to be uncovered.  Another key marketing
    distinction--"demand pull" and "demand push" (my terminology may be a
    bit off since it's been a few years since my last marketing course). 
    Demand pull marketing involves creating a demand and then pulling
    product through channels.  Push marketing is creating a product and
    trying to push it through channels without regard for demand.  I've
    only been here a short time but I think that this distinction may be
    the difference between past and future marketing strategies at
    Digital.
    
    Larry
    

    re: .6
    
    >I have seen (admittedly years ago) pricing of some DEC products
    >done like this:  Well our cost is x dollars per unit, and upper
    >management is requiring a 40% margin, so I guess that means the
    >price has to be 1.666 times X.  I don't know what marketing is,
    >but I know this ain't it.  I hope this  doesn't happen any more!
    >(I swear I am not making this up!)

    This is an appropriate strategy for certain types of markets. It
    provides the minimum price that covers costs and gives a good, but not
    perceived greedy or gouging, return on investment. It is appropriate for
    near-monopoly type markets where there is not significant competition,
    demand is large and not strongly price sensitive. Determining the
    market clearing price where quantity demanded matches quantity supplied
    is difficult with new products in an untested market so a cost plus
    pricing strategy is a good starting point. You might be leaving money
    on the table with this strategy but, even with a unique product in a
    new market, you don't want to price too high as you may end up
    attracting significant competition into your market.
    
    Other types of markets require other types of pricing strategies. In a
    commodity market with little product differentiation, the price is a
    given and has already been set by the market interactions between
    existing buyers and sellers. A new entrant to the market can't expect
    to price significantly different than the market price. In commodity
    markets, the market price is usually very close to the minimum required
    to provide the minimum level of return necessary to keep suppliers in
    the market. Price too high and nobody buys your product, price too low
    and you don't get an acceptable rate of return. If you want to price
    higher than market you have to offer something perceived to be a valued
    differentiator.

    I expect a good marketing group to understand all this and set an
    appropriate price for a product based on business goals and the type
    of market competing in.  Profit maximization is not the only
    consideration.

    As a sales person with MANY years of pounding the pavement, I wonder
    why there are so many notes trying to define what marketing is and
    there is no doubt what sales is.
    
    Ken

    Ok, here's my simplistic shot at an analogy -- think as Digital's sales
    and marketing groups as part of a vehicle repair shop.
    
    The mechanic has a tool box, where he keeps all the things he
    needs to get the job done - tools, rate books, technical manuals, and
    little spare parts.  The mechanic himself does the actual work, but he
    can't function or succeed without the things in his box.  Likewise, the
    tool box is useless without a mechanic to implement and utilize the
    items it holds.  Neither one can repair a vehicle or bring in any money
    without the other.
    
    So should marketing and sales be tied; marketing should provide all of
    the tools, such as advertising, product descriptions, other types of
    propaganda, realistic competitive information and training, market
    research that leads to saleable new products, selling tools such as
    workable pricing systems, presentations, etc.  The salesperson provides
    the talent, time and expertise to utilize and implement these things,
    thereby closing sales and bringing in revenue.
    
    Unfortunately, the tie that binds marketing and sales got stuck in a
    granny knot about 10 years ago, and it has been that way ever since.
    
    M.
    

    
    	I was going to ignore this whole thing, but my fingers got the
    better of me.
    
    	Sales is the SCIENCE of a transaction.
    
    	Marketing is the ART of creating an environment where the
        transaction can occur.
    
    	
    	Everything else is addition. Have a nice day. :-)
    
    
    			the Greyhawk

    Marketing tries to get the customer in the door (with a few bucks).
    Sales tries to get the customer out of the door (minus those bucks).
    
    ;-)

    Oh dear,we do have a problem..
    re .0
    Digital does not make the difference-we are so tainted by years of
    technical superiority that marketing has no place in most
    outfits.Marketing in Digital is mainly poor merchanidising
    re .1
    Joke,right?
    re .2
    Right in line 1,deadly wrong in line 2.Sales is no more important than
    any other piece.Marketing is the whole chain from research to inception
    to delivery.If you have a great product,great sales,great after sales
    service but a lousy receptionist to answer customer queries,then the
    marketing machine is bust.
    Additionally,marketing should know what customers want today just as
    much as sales folk
    re .4
    top of the class-I'll bet you aren't in marketing though
    re .6
    No,unfortunately I can corroborate that you aren't making this
    up-more's the pity
    
    Now,maybe I am a little jaundiced because I live in France where the
    translation of the word marketing means merchandising and advertising
    only

    If a so-called Marketing Professional or a Sales Professional has to
    have an answer to "What is the difference between Marketing & Sales"
    it's no wonder this company is in the shape it's in!

    As a veteran marketing person, I would agree that most, if not all, of
    the analogies in preceding replies do a good job of distinguishing
    Marketing from Sales, at least in a theoretical sense.  Let me try to
    supplement these with a practical perspective, gained through personal
    experience.
    
    Rarely does a Marketing group have in its control all elements of the
    "marketing mix".  And, what a corporation really expects of Marketing
    tends to change over time.  
    
    When a company is growing rapidly and profitably, Marketing is asked to 
    get out its crystal ball, and figure out what the company needs to be 
    doing to sustain this growth in the ensuing 2 to 3 years.  Marketing
    strategies and long range plans tend to be the most-sought outcomes of
    the Marketing effort.
    
    When growth falters, or profits disappear, Marketing is told to stop
    worrying about the future, and help Sales close business NOW.  Measures
    of success center on involvement with, and responsiveness to, the Field.
    
    I've seen this happen at Digital, and at other companies.  Therefore,
    my analogy for Marketing is "the corporate amoeba"...we must change
    shape to meet the changing needs of the company.  Many Marketing 
    organizations, and Marketing people, are unwilling or unable to make these 
    adaptations when called on.  Having this kind of versatility and 
    responsiveness is important for long-term success in this often
    misunderstood and undervalued profession. 
    
    Dennis Tompkins

    Re:  .8
    
    This is an excellent note. I learned something from both
    your treatment of when cost-plus is appropriate and from
    your description of the limits of its appropriateness. 
    
    After reading it, I've concluded two things:
    
    The case I had in mind was a case where the Digital name on the
    front cover provided so much perceived value added that it could
    be thought of as a near monopoly.  It was packaged training on
    subjects like VAX system manager.  Your note persuades me that
    maybe cost plus pricing was OK in that circumstance.
    
    Second, in a near monopoly situation, the first two "P"s:
    product and pricing may be carried on fairly successfully
    by someone with little marketing background, and little 
    conscious awareness of why what they are doing works.
    ("Shucks, I'm just doin' the right thing!").  If the person's
    focus is engineering, that person may move on to the next issue,
    which could be something like applying mass production techniques
    to  drive down per unit cost.
    
    If the market changes while the successful not-marketing 
    marketer isn't watching, then behaviour that was previously
    successful may have become unadapted.  The behaviour won't
    change until feedback that says that change is called for
    gets through.
    
    Something like that may have happened to Digital over the last
    10 years.
    
    Dave
    
                       

    .16
    
    I like your perspective.
    
    Never heard it quite that way.
    
    

    Whatever made you think that the original question came
    from someone in Marketing or Sales?
    
    Dave
    

    Does anyone have an opinion on whether a marketer should have sales 
    experience?
    
    I have my thoughts, but I'd like to hear yours.
    
    Michael

    Reply .19 should have had a reference back to .14
    
    My mistake.
    
    Dave
    

    > Should a marketer have sales experience?
    
    IMHO, absolutely (if not sales, then at least some type of related
    field experience). 
    
    	o   I believe that those in marketing who have sold before have a
            better appreciation for customer environments, and what the
            selling organization needs to be successful. 
    
    	o   Having done it yourself gives you a better sense for what will and
            will not be accepted or useful in the field.
    
    	o   From having done it, one usually develops a fairly wide circle of
            field acquaintences that can be drawn upon for input concerning
            ideas on products or ways to better support the field in
            selling to customers.
    
    	o   From having done it, one also has customer acquaintances who can
            also act as good sounding boards for testing product
            development ideas or marketing campaigns.
    
    Although working in sales itself is probably best, in my view having
    worked in the field in a similar capacity (like sales support or DC)
    is an acceptable prerequisite as well. 
    
    

    .20  Should someone in Marketing have sales experience?
    
    Don't frame the thought just to marketing. I suggest anyone in
    management MUST have sales experience!

    Now for the real question.  Those in Marketing only reply...
    
    How are we doing?  Or phrased differently, does Digital's marketing
    group do marketing in the same way that the best in class does?  
    
    We don't get rave reviews from the outside - how about from the inside.  
    Constructive evaluations and ideas, please.
    
    

    I'm in Marketing (UK Digital Consulting).
    
    My answer to .24 is yes, when we're allowed to.  The biggest problem I
    have experienced is always having a sales person as head of marketing
    with the mindset that marketing's role is to deliver leads.  So, we
    only get to run promotional campaigns!
    
    In my marketing team we have the skills and experience to do all the
    things referred to in other notes:
    
    	- market research
    	- portfolio management
    	- channel strategy
    	- promotion
    	- etc
    
    but we only get budget and brownie points for doing promotion!
    
    Regards, Jenny

    Leland is that you? - MCI
    
    We talked in Cedar Rapids about sales needs.
    
    

    RE .25
    
    I've been in both Sales and field based marketing (which I perceive to
    be your role). It appears to me that the further one is away from the
    Corporate flag pole, the further the term (and job) marketing is away
    from the classic definitions and the more it is related to generating
    leads. 
    
    I too was in field based markeitng for a couple of years, back when we
    had Regional Marketing groups. While I did some market research, the
    majority of my time was devoted to lead generation activities -
    seminars, trade shows and sales calls. This was percieved to be
    marketing by the field sales management, for who field based marketing
    worked.
    
    IMHO Digital's marketing (in the classic sense) is turning around and
    getting better, witness the new ad campaign. We still have a long way
    to go and we still need better research and guidance from marketing to
    the product planning people.
    
    OFWAMI :^) 

    
    	Hey Norm, glad to see you've survived. Give me a call.
    
    	Folks, -1 is right on. We used to work together when we were in
    field marketing many many moons ago. Werner knows exactly of what he
    speaks. He was Mr. AutoFact.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    
    I received an 'event attendee report' in the mail on friday 8/26 
    from Digital.
    
    it was a lead from a trade show on which the attendee (a vp from
    a manufacturing company here in Michigan) had checked the boxes..
    	X have salesman call
    	x send literature
    	x interresed in moving to Alpha AXP
    
    I gave him a call on Monday 8/29 and explained who I was and why
    I was calling..
    
    He chuckled and said my call was timely, he had just taken delivery
    of his HP server. The 'attendee' report was from the Uniforum show
    in MARCH this year and I was the FIRST person from digital who had
    contacted him...
    
    this is scarry !!
    
    /kd
    
    

    re: -1
    
    It is scary, but it has been happening for a long time. I think it has
    something to do with our history with trade shows and why we go to
    them. Lots of times I hear people say that we go to trade shows to
    make sure "the world knows what we have to offer". Although some
    people talk about "increasing sales" as the result of trade shows, I've
    always felt like we go to them as an educational mission.
    
    Another company I worked for went to trade shows to "CLOSE ORDERS".
    Everything we did was focused on making the trade show a closing event.
    We layed out the booth to maximize traffic flow and had just as much
    space devoted to "Closing Booths" as we did to display areas. We
    brought literature and order forms to the show. (When did you ever see
    this at a show Digital participated in?)
    
    Closing business and tracking leads were taken very seriously and
    measured DAILY against goals.
    
    Sales people on the floor participated in two contests at every trade
    show;   An award for the person who closed the most business and an
    award for the person who wrote the most leads. Awards were given out
    daily and for the "total show". 
    
    The result:  We wrote millions of dollars worth of business at every
    trade show we went to (and our products were not $5 items either).  AND
    
    ALL Leads from the trade show were in the hands of either:
    
    	o  The right sales rep
    	o  The right Unit Manager  OR
    	o  (Worst case) the right District Manager
    
    WITHIN 24-48 HOURS of when the lead was WRITTEN (not after the show was
    over).  
    
    When I was in the field, our Region was trying to get DECworld leads
    for MONTHS after the show ended. 
    
    In my opinion we get what we plan for. If you go to a show to educate
    people about what you have, that's what you'll do. If we really went
    there to sell something, leads wouldn't be bubbling up 4 months after
    the show was over.
    
    /se
    
    
    

    I was at a trade show in New York in April for four days
    demoing. In that time we generated over 100 leads. Due to
    the nature of the product I work on (production workflow)
    each lead represents an opportunity for add on sales for
    client/server environments and consultancy services. Most
    leads represented new prospects and not the existing
    customer base.
    
    When we tried to find out who to give them to (I'm from
    engineering Europe) we were pretty much told that it
    wasn't clear who the sales force was anymore due to 
    the (coming) reorganisations and we would have to follow
    up ourselves.
    
    We tried approaching various US regional sales offices and
    sent some leads to various parties but we couldn't find
    anybody who felt they owned the issue...
    
    I threw the leads away last week.
                                            

    >Sales is not our strong point...
    
    I think you're making a mistake Roelof.
    It's not that sales is not our strong point, but we only want to sell
    to customers who come banging on our door and beg on their knees if
    they can buy something from us.
    
    Charles

re.31:

Why were Digital even at a trade show when we didn't have anyone in 
sales ready to follow through any leads? Perhaps collecting leads was 
not an objective and someone forgot to tell everyone in the booth? 

Dave.

>Why were Digital even at a trade show when we didn't have anyone in 
>sales ready to follow through any leads? Perhaps collecting leads was 
            
    Due to the reorganisations it appeared that we didn't have anyone
    in sales, period. From other anectodes in this conference this
    may still be the situation in real life (vs DECspeak). I just
    don't have a clue what the actual sales force is, how its goaled
    today and how effective it is.

    re:  We had the U.S. area sales management team supporting the show to
    process the leads.  Clearly, this is an area that concerns us at every
    show, and usually does not get executed well.
    
    Mark