Marketing 2.0: How to transform an organization from inside-out to outside-in

Today I read an excellent and thought provoking post from Tony Zambito titled: "Is it reach and engage or listen and engage?".

The post raises questions regarding the ideal approach in this marketing 2.0 world - and the transformation challenge organizations face in order to implement outside-in approaches.

I agree with Tony that marketing 2.0 approaches require listening to come first.

However I think it's simplistic to talk about listen, engage and reach in isolation. Also, I don't believe this is only about social. 

Here's my take on the elements required (I'd appreciate any feedback on this):

In my humble opinion, whole 360 degree integrated plans need to be designed from the outside-in, based on insight into the target audience. Rather than using the word 'target' which suggests hunting to 'reach' them.. Or 'audience' which suggests they're passive, I'll call them a constituency - a group of people with shared interests, beliefs or ambitions that the organization wants to serve and create value exchange with. (In order to create any plan there would probably need to be a clear objective  & outcomes set too).

By starting with a specific constituency (group of customers /prospects /clients) in mind - and LISTENING to them, relevant content and communication vehicles could be selected to form part of an integrated plan. This would, as Tony articulated, involve embracing the constituency in terms of collaborating two-way - and ENGAGING in relevant ways (incl. internal experts connecting with experts/influencers in the constituency 'peer-to-peer', ensuring web pages and assets on paid/owned/earned domains show up in natural search results, with clear, relevant calls to action, as well as more traditional one-to-many marketing communications integrated across organizational silos). 

Re. REACH: ideally, by listening first, the content developed would be so highly relevant and valuable that members of the constituency are energized to share the messages / content / agenda on the organisation's behalf. (This would create free 'REACH' from peers, who are likely to be more trusted sources than marketing messages). This wouldn't necessarily replace traditional push tactics, but could augment.

Lastly, I see iteration of plans in short test & learn cycles playing an important role in the ideal plan, allowing fast optimization and (per Tony Zambito's earlier post) the ability to keep the messages / content / agenda aligned with the interests, shared beliefs, ambitions and digital usage patterns of the defined constituency over time.

Does this map to your thinking or would you change the approach?

A question: What I spend a lot of time thinking about is HOW might employees encourage an organization to develop the appetite for this large scale transformation effort? What would motivate an org. with multiple silos and different planning approaches (incl. many 'inside-out' ones) to self-analyse and redesign the org. to make constituent-focused outside-in approaches possible? 

Keen to hear any thoughts on this!

Comments

[Tony Zambito]

Hi Rowan,

Thank you for your mention and your own articulate response. I will focus on something that is central to our conversation. That is, insight. Insight that drives the outside-in thinking that organizations today must adopt. Without deep insight, it will be difficult for organizations to undergo change. Insight into a constituenccy - which I like that description very much - needs to guide CEO's to make the transformative changes. Insight needs to be an objective voice that informs future strategies and structures to support such. Including the 360 integrated planning you speak of. This to me is a fundamental commitment senior leaders need to make and to overcome fears that insights may challenge their existing agendas. Thank you for engaging and I appreciated the perspectives you've written here in your excellent article!

Tony

[Ro Hetherington]

Tony, thanks for your reply and your insight (pardon the pun). You have certainly given me more to think about.

I have seen insights from listening build urgency / provide a compelling reason for change but I'm seeing broader options now.

Thanks again!