Showing posts with label CMO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CMO. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Vision vs Roadmap: Part II


In part one we defined the difference between the vision (emotional) and roadmap (logical).  In part 2 we’ll discuss the connection between the two. 

Marketing is tasked with creating a long term vision for the product and/or for the company.  This is a valuable function of the marketing department.  This vision is often referred to as the 10,000 foot view.  In some cases, marketing visionaries take this to 100,000 feet.  Here, we refer to this as the “airplane”.


Down on the ground, sales people with quotas “sell what’s on the truck”.  For this discussion all products will be referred to as “a box”.  The box is on the truck for the sales teams to sell today.  Traditional, or tactical, marketing, engages in activity (demand generation, collateral development, et al) to assist the sales teams effort in selling “off the truck”. 



Engineering develops the next products to put on the truck.  They base their development roadmap on numerous factors such as customer demands, competitive pressures, market windows and available technologies to name a few. 

A major disconnect between marketing and sales, and therefore engineering, is the lack of connection between the vision and the roadmap; the airplane and the truck.   The consequence is all the effort to market the airplane does nothing for the sales person on the street selling boxes off the truck.

The VISION
It’s important to push the envelope when developing your vision.   Remember a vision is emotional and emotions are ethereal not concrete.   As the vision moves out in time it’s acceptable that it gets blurry or fuzzy in the later years.   A good metaphor is the hurricane map.  


Meteorologists know where the eye of the hurricane is at a given moment.  They have an idea of where it will be at points in the future.   The further out in time the less certain they are where it will be.  The same is true for your vision. 

However, if the vision is too far-fetched  or worse technically infeasible, your credibility vanishes never to be recaptured.   To prevent against this we’ll use the word “plausible”.  From Webster.com “plausible” means;

Definition of PLAUSIBLE: superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious <a plausible pretext>

To ensure the vision is plausible ask the engineers if they could develop feature X if they had the resources (time, money and people) and the prioritization to develop it.  Or, in other words, could it be in a future release at some date in the future.  If the honest answer is "yes" then it’s plausible and belongs in the vision.

By ensuring plausibility and by including engineering in the vision development you will have the credibility with the customer and the collaboration and buy-in with the technical teams. 

In keeping with my previous post of the global phenomena of Attention Deficit Disorder, I’ll end this with some pointers of what to consider when developing your vision..

1.       Focus on how your customer, and their customers, business and lives will benefit.
2.       Focus on how the world will look with the benefits of your solution.
3.       Create a compelling view of the future
4.       Illustrate how well you understand their business, their customers business and the concerns, challenges and issues of both.
5.       Addresses CxO level care-abouts
6.       Ensure it’s in a time frame of interest and reasonableness (3-5 years)

In Part III we’ll discuss the different buying decisions of the vision and the roadmap and how to link them together to sell products today and tomorrow.

Sign up to this blog to ensure you get future post....

Sunday, February 10, 2013

CMO : Best Friends with the CIO or CTO? Both!



I recently saw an article about CMOs become more quantitative with the onslaught of “big data” and analytics.  It then suggested we watch the relationship between the CMO and the CIO.  While this is interesting it only addresses 50% of the CMO’s role.  The role of “selling what’s on the truck”. 

The other 50% should be concerned with figuring out what to put on the truck in 1 to 5 years.  In this role the CMO should be “joined at the hip” with the CTO. 

If this is true, which it is, is this role too big for one person?  Should we create a CTMO (Chief Technical Marketing Officer)?

I’d be interested in your comments.  

Friday, February 8, 2013

SDN: Nothing New Here, Move Along




SDN is a new disruptive technology with great potential to move the networking industry forward.  What’s not new is the industry forces “new disruptive technologies” face.   Here’s we are talking classic “S-Curves” and classic Gaussian market adoption as illustrated below.



The existing technology, HDN, is well establish and far along the Gaussian adoption curve.   Service providers, large enterprises and all the way to the home user have adopted IP networks.  They are well understood technically, financially and organizationally.  Each of these creates barriers to adoption.  A new technology, SDN, faces that same challenges other new technologies. 

A direct historical example was the adoption of IP within the service provider market.  TDM was well established. It  had 99.999% availability, it supported 100’s of millions of end points, it had trained organizations to support it (unions) and it generated $100 of billions in revenues.   Whether you lived in the tornado (ala Geoffery Moore) or not, it’s easy to imagine the anti-inertia throughout the organization.   The same forces exist(ed) in the Cable industry.  For years they loathed terms such as “IPTV” and “IP NGN”.  [Even though VOD was IP to the QAM.]

Business and marketing professionals at all levels of organizations need to remember this.

SDN is facing these same anti-inertia forces.  Nothing new here.  

Sign up to be alerted when Part II is posted...