I have some bad news for marketers...76 percent of us are not realizing the full revenue potential from our customers. I am simply repeating what many of you reported in our latest survey, Routes to Revenue. However, while some might take this to mean marketers are UNABLE to realize the full revenue potential from customers, the reality is that often times the core tools needed are unavailable and simply unattainable. I'm talking about customer data. In report after report, we hear that data is often siloed, tucked away in functional pods, sometimes nothing more than enhanced contact information.

But, there is opportunity here. Marketers can lead the charge and become the keeper of customer insight, customer data and most importantly, customer experience. This mandate has never been more embraced and celebrated than at the 2008 CMO Summit. We heard strong keynote addresses that provided insights into how strong marketing planning, establishment of automation systems to enhance marketing operations, and utilization of predictive analytics of trustworthy customer data can open new routes to revenue throughout 2009.

Within the coming weeks, we will be offering an on-demand webcast of the proceedings of the 2008 CMO Summit. While the keynote addresses from SAP's Dr. Ralf Strauss and SPSS' Colin Shearer are reason enough to log in, the absolutely hysterical presentation from Michael Tchong can not be missed! Most important, the CMO Summit brought out key issues that are going to be top of mind for many marketers in the year to come.

We hope that as we march into 2009, these two resources, Routes to Revenue, the report, and Routes to Revenue, the 2008 CMO Summit, will inspire you to continue to be change agents within your organization. We can pull that 360-degree view of our customers and develop strategies and programs that leverage this trustworthy data to personalize communications, target promotions and optimize the customer experience.

Finally, it is that time of year where we ask you help us benchmark Marketing's outlook for the year to come. We ask that you take a few moments to contribute your insights to the 2009 CMO Council Marketing Outlook initiative. We also ask that you forward the link to your senior marketing colleagues. It is important to get as broad of a perspective as possible as we look into marketing's crystal ball for a glimpse into the future!

See you 2009!

Liz Miller
VP, Programs & Operations
CMO Council

Where is the Contingency Plan? A Marketing Responsibility

By Nicholas C. Watkis

The findings of the survey of the 2008 Global Strategic Reward survey by management consultancy Watson Wyatt, makes interesting and alarming reading. The consultancy spoke with 1,389 organizations in 37 countries about what, if any, contingency plans they had in place in the summer of 2008, to cope with the possibility of an economic downturn.

Despite the facts indicting that the current credit crisis has been developing for at least a year it is surprising that 32% of US businesses did not have any contingency plans to deal with an economic slowdown. One in five UK companies (21%) had made no contingency plans ahead of the current financial crisis for managing their workforce during an economic downturn. The percentage of European companies without a contingency plan was similar. While the figures vary across Europe, the survey showed that of all the firms surveyed ,13% of German, 15% of Irish, 18% of Italian, 25% of Dutch , 26% of Swedish and 43% of Spanish firms had not made any contingency plans. By contrast all the French firms surveyed, had prepared contingency plans for an economic slowdown.

The whole purpose of business and marketing plans is to prepare for the expected and intended, but equally for the unexpected event or conditions whether good or bad. The question must be why, when the economic indicators have been there for all to see, have so many companies not prepared themselves and planned for the possibility of a rapid change in the economic climate?

For many business planners and marketers, the preparation of business and marketing plans is such a protracted affair, that the idea of preparing contingency plans hardly comes into it. Yet the "what if "question, is vital if plans are not to be thrown into disarray when events turn out differently from that which was expected. Marketers have the responsibility to deliver sustainable profitable revenue to their business. It is therefore incumbent upon them to identify potential problems in the market and the economy and to prepare accordingly. How should they do this? The various quality economic surveys are a prime source of information, as are Government reports, the Bank of England, and economic forecasts from the principle financial institutions and banks. Collectively these can provide good indicators of the economic climate and its future. In addition, statistical information regarding trends and activity in the relevant market sectors is important, as this sets out the forecast of the prevailing trading conditions in the immediate future.

If the preparation of a business or marketing plan is completed properly, the process will require an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses opportunities and threats( SWOT) that effect the business. Strengths and weaknesses are confined to that of the organization in relation to its overall performance in the market and against the competition. Opportunities and threats cover those external factors which affect the business e.g., Health and Safety, economics, legal aspects, as well as those that are seen directly effecting marketing such as competitor activity and market trends. Additionally, opportunities and threats relate to Political, Economic, Social and Technological factors that can effect the business Assessing the nature of these factors is generally carried out through a PEST Analysis. PEST (Political, Economic, Social and Technological) is used to describe the framework of analysis of the external macro-environment in which the firm operates and assess the potential risks to the business or marketing plans. Marketers should then have an understanding of the external risks to their plan, and consider the "What ifs". What if the principle contract of this year's revenue does not come in on time, or what if you fail to win the contract? What if the economic slow down reduces demand? How will the hole in the revenue plan be filled? What actions will have to be taken and by whom? When do you have to confirm contract success or failure in order to make good the revenue plan?

Business and marketing plans are essential working tools for effective management, to ensure that assets and resources are used effectively to achieve the objective and should not be seen as a tedious annual event. Used properly, the business and marketing plans should be in continuous use as a working management tool, being regularly reviewed and revised to meet changing conditions, so that resources can be moved effectively when the unexpected happens. If all companies had drawn up their business and marketing plans properly earlier this year or even last year, then the possibility of the credit squeeze and recession should have been recognized, as all the signs were there, even if they were thought remote. Based on those possibilities marketers should have prepared contingency plans to deal with the situation. Over the next few months it will soon become apparent which marketers prepared and implemented effective contingency plans and which did not. If businesses have failed to make effective contingency plans to deal with the current economic and market situation, then marketers must take a major part of the responsibility, as theirs is the task of maximizing sustainable profitable revenue.

Nicholas Watkis set up Contract Marketing Service in 1981, providing professional interim marketing management for a wide variety of businesses. Over 20 years practical experience in organizations, large and small, national and international, led to the development of specialist management consultancy in marketing management and measuring marketing performance. A Certified Management Consultant of the Institute of Management Consultancy, he was elected a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Marketing in November 2007.

Mapping Tool Rates 20 Top Brands on Public Perception of Sustainability
By Simon Dunne

In the summer of 2008, as brands raced to slather themselves green, branding and communications company Change wondered if they were seeing a return on their investment. Has green helped companies build brand equity? Have consumers been noticing their efforts and rewarding them?

As companies across the globe race to adopt and brand sustainability for competitive advantage, consumers have become overloaded with green messaging, confused by the issues, and wary of greenwashing.

The MapChange project was undertaken to clarify two things: how committed Canada's top brands are to the environment. And, how committed consumers think they are.

THE MAP
The study was presented using the classic perceptual map with a bit of a twist — instead of traditional axes like price vs. quality, Change plotted Actual Sustainability (what a brand is doing to address environmental issues), against Perceived Sustainability (what consumers believe them to be doing).

WHAT CHANGE FOUND OUT
Better action does not equal better perception. There is a randomness to the findings that suggests very few brands have successfully branded sustainability. Brands like GM and Molson have been making significant environmental strides, but consumers still see them as laggards. Toyota - by far the leader in Perceived Sustainability, and one of the few brands that has been successful with green branding - scored lower on Actual Sustainability than both GM and Molson.

If you're a cool company, you must been green. A halo effect appears to be evident with companies like Apple. While their Actual Sustainability score ranked fourteenth, their Perceived Sustainability was fifth. The popularity of Apple's recent products seems to be resulting in a general positive perception of the company, including that of their environmental commitment.

Consumers don't distinguish green from good. There appears to be a blanket effect in terms of 'Corporate Social Responsibility', with consumers ranking brands with strong community programs high on environmental commitment. Despite scoring low on Actual Sustainability, Rona and Canadian Tire, two leaders in community initiatives, both scored high on Perceived Sustainability.

It's tough to convince consumers you've changed. In the opposite case to Apple's, companies that have had some past public image problems seem to have difficulty overcoming those perceptions. Nike ranked seventeenth on Perceived Sustainability, despite being fifth on Actual Sustainability.

According to consumers, most brands are not green. Despite green messaging from many of the brands, only four of the twenty brands managed a positive perception score.

WHAT IT MEANS FOR BRANDS
While companies have begun to capitalize on the efficiency side of sustainability, few have successfully branded their efforts to consumers. And they should. According to research by the Research Institute at New York University's Stern School of Business, a 5% change in the reputation of a company is equal to a 1% to 5% change in its market value.

The MapChange study challenges the assumption that addressing sustainability in one's organization will automatically improve its brand's reputation with consumers. Without proper attention to communicating sustainability efforts to consumers, their perceptions may not change.

At the same time, false claims will be remembered by consumers and can diminish brand value for a long time. Communicating sustainability needs to be done carefully to avoid greenwashing, but it can still be done. Consider these tips:

BE FULLY TRANSPARENT. Even if you're not achieving as much as you could, or should, consumers will appreciate transparency. Modestly stating your successes and highlighting areas to improve will help garner consumer support. Conversely, hiding from the spotlight only makes consumers assume the worst.

ENCOURAGE AN OPEN DIALOGUE. Companies like Patagonia have had great branding success by encouraging an open dialogue with their consumers. Help your consumers lead you towards sustainability by inviting their input and feedback. They'll feel a part of your success and be more willing to support you.

SILENCE IS TOO MODEST. The fear of greenwashing has caused many companies to clam up. While modesty is a good trait, silence is too modest. Consumers need to know what you're doing so they can get involved, make informed decisions, and reward brands with values that match their own.

MAKE IT AN EASY GET. It's great to have a factory that runs entirely on solar energy, but the consumer is only going to see the product that comes out of it. Make sure your all brand touchpoints reinforce your sustainability mandate.

GREEN IS SECONDARY. Communicating the green features of your products can hel differentiate you from the competition, but it's a rare consumer that will buy green for green. Consumers expect your product to compete on price, quality and convenience first. Once they're confident it does, then you can talk about green.

The study is available online or to find out more, contact Simon Dunne at simon@changebiz.com.