Two out of three CEOs distrust their CMOs, and only 17% of marketing leaders are ‘pioneering’, says Accenture
Distrust about the capabilities of chief marketing officers from their chief executive officers means marketing leaders have to “reinvent” the way they do business and adapt to a more disruptive landscape, a Marketing Society event in Singapore has been told.
The gathering of 50 high-level marketing leaders at the Singapore Economic Development Board headquarters featured an analysis of the Accenture report Way Beyond Marketing: The rise of the hyper-relevant CMO. The attendees heard that while CEOs wanted marketing leaders to drive revenue growth, the majority doubted that they had the capacity to deliver on that goal. This perhaps explained why the CMO had the shortest average tenure of any C-suite executive, at just 18 months, and why marketing departments were often seen as a cost centre rather than a profit centre.
“Incumbent CEOs, for their part, aren’t particularly optimistic,” the research stated. “Two in three don’t believe that their current marketing leads have the leadership skills or business acumen required for the role. And, CEOs are equally unconvinced that the next generation of marketeers will be any more capable when they eventually take the reins.
The root cause of the issue is that some in the C-suite believe the case studies in this article are groundbreaking – “Spanish telecoms company Telefónica, for example, found that their customers make most of their buying decisions online”.
If the CEO finds this revolutionary, no wonder they don’t trust the CMO because they don’t really know what’s going on.
If the CMO finds this an enlightening insight in 2019 of course the CEO will start reevaluating if they are the right person for the job.
Hhmmm,
That’s because the notion of “CMO” was created by a generation of fluffy under performing, aged marketing directors – looking for a level of self-empowerment – over delivery and substance. The CMO – has actually given “marketing” a bad name. Need to now wait for the real “sales and marketing” directors to move through – and demonstrate delivery – over the previous generations “I want a seat at the table” desires.
While I tend to agree that there’s and element of underperforming, unqualified people masquerading as CMOs, the C-Suite has to take some responsibility for the failure of the CMO.
I have witnessed several CEOs dictate marketing to the point where they render the CMO useless. I’ve worked with many good marketers who were unable to creatively and culturally shine because the CEO couldn’t leave a marketing function well alone or trust a vision that isn’t his/her own.
I’ve seen countless ad campaigns destroyed because the CEO has to put their mark on it over and over again until it doesn’t even make sense.
CEOs tend to have to trust other C-Suite colleages such as CIO, CTO, CFO etc because it’s a tangible skill set that they don’t know enough about. Sadly for the CMO, creativity is subjective, and in many cases, the CEO always seems to think (s)he knows better in the realm of marketing. Most of the time, this is far from true.
So perhaps these findings need to be factor that ‘mistrust’ and CEO narcissism go hand in hand.
….the ever increasing number of CMO’s in Australia out of work and on the market.
It’s either that or there’s a recession in the industry and CMO salaries are the first to go.
Let’s be real. That speech as recounted in the article was a word salad. That right there is your reason why CEO’s are distrustful of senior marketers. I’ve lost count of how many management meetings I’ve been in where the CMO probably had a random buzzword generator, and made it clear they didn’t understand what their own team were telling them. Oh and we all know why the average tenure is 18 months. That’s the perfect window in which they can land in a new role and then immediately start canvassing for their next step, so they can be out before a) they’re exposed, and b) they don’t have to deal with the medium term consequences of their initial burst of “change everything” initiative- rebranding for no reason, restructuring their team and sending everything out to pitch.
I have worked with one of the 17 percent of CMO’s you are talking about @Camilla Cooke who disrupted, broke the rules, challenged the status quo and through an incredible brand, marketing and cultural leadership strategy we made it to charity of the year and one of the top 100 innovative companies in Australia. She is one outstanding human and marketer. Her work is sexy. It wasn’t because Camilla was a hero, she is humble and fair – none of us considered ourselves hero’s. Through the design process we, as a committed, focused, trusting and brutally honest executive team went very deep, comprehensively in every aspect of the strategy and the mission. We became the unstoppable trim tab of the organisation. The notion of a CEO leading everything is beyond old fashioned and so bloody masculine centric in approach. The notion of a CMO magically bringing in revenue is outdated. Rather, it is the CMO having the freedom to flow, the currency of innovation and the governance to protect, enabled by a deep design across the system embedded into the organisation that will yield reputation, revenue and relationships. That magical dynamic between the CEO and CMO needs to be enabled and unlocked, I got out of her way and we focused on business outcomes. We were and still are Shackleton’s journey. Knowing how to herd lions brings in revenue. Being bold, focused, crisp and clear brings in revenue, Being focused on the mission rather than being powerfully egoic brings in revenue. Emebdding vision, currency and relevancy brings brand halo and engagement at all levels; Courage and culture over fear and constraints keeps the strategy alive. Being unapologetic brings authenticity. Stabbing in the front brings trust and loyalty. You want a great CMO, then join the queue for Camilla. I hope she can share her insights with other CEO’s and CMO’s to empower and inspire – I’m sure Camilla would do a few keynotes and consulting for the right fee.
The 17% who hyper-personalise and “disrupt” I’d like to see sales and ROI figures from them. In my experience deploying the latest tech or trend (agile is currently at peak fashion in Australia, as is hyper-relevance) usually costs a lot more than it ever returns. But nobody ever loses their job for saying lets employ 10 agile coaches from acme mgmt consulting firm to transform our business. Or maybe they do in about 18 months. The more “disruptive” Accenture think they are, likely the less effective the CEO would eventually find them to be. And then who does the confused CEO call? The consultants… ahh the irony!