Fred Bristol

As marketers, we grow sales and revenue by increasing market share and by increasing the size of the market itself.  So, in addition to convincing consumers to choose our product over our competitors, we try to attract consumers to the product category itself.  Dunlop wants more people playing tennis, in addition to convincing them to choose their racquets and balls over Wilson and Prince.

Similarly, political parties use the same philosophy to increase their power by growing the voter base instead of just convincing current voters that their policies are best.  They want more people voting who tend to agree with their policies.  Therefore, we’ve seen white hat tactics like voter registration and get out the vote drives for years.

However, what do you think of the push for open borders, generous benefits for illegal immigrants, and liberal voting laws?  Is that black hat marketing?  Do you think they are trading the security of our country and our elections for their own political power?

A similar question arises when discussing the control of seats of power like the Senate and Supreme Court.  Instead of using constitutional, white hat strategies such as winning elections, there’s talk of using questionable means by increasing the size of these bodies with new seats that tend to vote with them.  Is it a black hat move to grant statehood to the District of Colombia and Puerto Rico to increase the size of the Senate?  Or packing the Supreme Court with judges who will rule in your favor?  Are these legitimate, moral ways to “grow the market” or are they unconstitutional?

How Americans view these policies comes down to how they are marketed, explained, and justified.  If the policies are described in glowing, moralistic terms on mainstream media and in our schools, they can control the narrative and the court of public opinion.  So, you hear legislation with automatic registration, universal mail-in ballots and weakened voter ID laws described as “expanding voter rights” instead of making our elections less secure. That’s good PR and white hat marketing, even though the cynic can easily see how these policies are nothing more than a blatant grab for perpetual power and the ability to control our lives.  But, if dissenting voices are censored, arrested, and libeled, that’s dirty black hat politics and threatens our democracy.  Unfortunately, we’re seeing too much of the later.  Black hat strategy followed by black hat marketing.

Joining and being active in associations:  a chamber of commerce; an industry trade group AND a professional association like Buffalo Niagara Sales and Marketing Executives (BNSME) is the most overlooked and underrated business and career boosting activity.  Two of the most important drivers of success are making connections with your various stakeholders and keeping up-to-date with developments in your industry, markets and profession.  And it turns out, networking and professional development are the two major benefits of associations.  However, the key to gaining leverage from this activity is to be involved in all three types of organizations, not just one.  Not only do they offer unique benefits and target audiences that are all very important to your business and your career, there is a significant cumulative effect of having all three memberships.

Let’s take networking.  These groups attract very different memberships, all of whom are important for your success.  In a chamber, it could be people who buy your products or services, hire you, or public officials who pass legislation that affects your business.  An industry group offers the ability to develop collaborations and partnerships, and sales opportunities for those who serve that industry.  And a professional organization offers a combination of the two:  business and career development.

The secret to networking in these organizations is not to immediately start looking for sales, a job, or whatever benefit you are seeking.  It’s about getting to know other members, helping them before asking them to help you, and expanding your circle of influence through them.  People buy from, hire, help, and do business with people they know and like.  There are hundreds of companies and people who do what you do and do it just as well.  The true competitive advantage is to get to know those who can help you and be visible to them on a regular basis.

And you can be a triple threat by belonging to all three types of organizations.  Not only will you associate with constituencies that are all important, you will likely find some overlap.  When you start networking with these people in different venues, your bond with them becomes even more powerful and results in an exponential impact on your networking efforts.

Professional development and finding out competitive information are other benefits common to all three types of organizations.  Here, what you learn is distinctly different among the three types of associations because it relates to your community, industry or profession.  You’ll have access to information that’s not common knowledge among your competitors, giving you a distinct advantage.  Keeping current on developments in these three areas will give you an inside track on numerous opportunities for you and your business.

There are many other benefits that are common among the three organizations but are distinctly different and require membership in all three.  Advocacy is needed to influence laws and regulations that impact your community, industry and profession.  The discounts offered by the three organizations are different.  The marketing and recruiting benefits are targeted to different groups.  And the credibility that you gain from your memberships make you more trustworthy to these distinct membership groups. The only way to take advantage of all these opportunities is to join your local chamber, your industry group and your professional organization like BNSME.

So, here’s my advice.  Maintain at least these three memberships.  Be active in all three by attending events, volunteering for leadership positions, and fully participating in all the appropriate benefits they offer.  For instance, they all offer marketing and sponsorship opportunities that are an incredible value.  I guarantee that doing this will give you a distinct competitive advantage for your business and career because it is the most overlooked activity in business.  And you know what?  You’ll enjoy the comradery of your fellow members.

My practice of inviting working professionals to speak to my students is consistently ranked as one of the favorite aspects of my courses.  Why is that?  It’s because they learn about:

1. The real-world application of the theories and tools that are discussed in class. They better understand why each subject we study is important and the benefits of knowing them.  What better motivation for learning!  Plus, they see these practices in action from the case studies the speakers share.  This includes how to adapt implementation to each situation.
2. A wide variety of career paths that led to the professional success of the speakers; the common elements of them; and the lessons our speakers have learned over their careers. The path to success is never a straight line.  The road is littered with challenges, bumps and bruises.  So, the stories they tell of their pasts serve as terrific motivation for the students, no matter what their circumstance.
3. What these managers look for in making their hiring decisions and what is their advice for preparing to enter the workforce. This gives students specific recommendations for their career and for making themselves more employable.  Another great motivator for completing the projects I assign!  In fact, many of my assignments are a direct result of recommendations from these professionals.
4. Job and internship opportunities. I’m amazed how many of my students get internships and/or jobs directly from connecting with a speaker in my class.  This is because students are exposed to the company and manager, so know if it will be a fit.  And they have an entrée into the company based this connection, giving them a leg up on someone cold calling the company.  Of course, the company benefits from this recruiting platform as well.
5.  Useful networking connections, groups and events. I reinforce the importance of networking and using LinkedIn to my students, so connecting with the speakers and with the resources they recommend goes a long way to expanding their horizons.  It opens a whole world for the students to explore:  other professionals, applications and websites, thought leaders, books, events to attend and groups to join.
6.  Differing opinions. While most of the topics discussed help reinforce what we are studying, there is a healthy amount of differing opinions.  The speakers help us sort through what’s important and what’s irrelevant in the text, where they disagree with what is taught, and the importance of adapting everything to the situation at hand.  Often, they even disagree with each other and with me.  That’s okay!  Because in the real-world, there are always differing opinions and multiple right approaches.  While I share my experiences in the real-world of business, I’m only one person.  Now my students have over a dozen experiences, careers and opinions to add important substance to their learning.

What started as an occasional practice of having a few guest speakers has turned into a key aspect of my courses because of the above reasons and feedback from students.  While learning the fundamentals from the texts, articles and certifications I assign is important, it is amplified exponentially by the lessons students learn from the working professionals who generously give of their time to speak to my classes.

1. By discouraging productivity and career advancement. Since these government benefits have maximum income thresholds at which you no longer qualify, you’ll have less incentive to work hard and earn further raises as you approach that income level.  Families will limit those in the workforce and will have less incentive to create and invest in income-producing assets.

2. By raising prices without adding value. The price residents pay to live in a state (the taxes) will need to increase to pay for any new government handout.  However, the benefits of these programs are not enjoyed by those paying the bulk of the cost through their taxes.

3. By exhibiting anti-competitive behavior. Governments too often choose winners and losers with their tax policies and regulations.  They don’t let the free market determine the products and prices that are offered.  In the case of programs like free tuition, they go so far as to make their own state-sponsored colleges and universities clear winners over private institutions, since students can only attend SUNY institutions to get free tuition.

4. By not nurturing your best customers and by treating them poorly. Governmental entities have never had a very customer-friendly mindset, but these programs could be the worst example.  The most productive members of our society receive none of the goodies and in fact must pay for others to receive them.  If New York continues these types of policies, it’s going to drive its best customers, those with the highest incomes and thus highest taxes, to other states.

5. By investing in assets disproportionately to their useful life. Sure, many students will remain in the state, but too many will leave following their graduation, reducing the ROI (return on our investment in them) below acceptable levels.  This will only get worse as states with high levels of handouts continue to raise taxes and implement other anti-business practices to pay for them.  Businesses will also starting leaving these states with their jobs and the student exodus will get worse.

1. Launching a new competitor in an oligopoly is extremely difficult, even if consumers are not satisfied. The Democrat and Republican parties control the political system in the United States.  Given the dislike of the two major party candidates and the level of dissatisfaction with the direction of the country during the 2016 election, the environment was ripe for the rise of a third party – especially with a good alternative like the Libertarian party that could appeal to members of both parties by being in the middle of the political spectrum and by supporting the best elements of both parties.  So why weren’t they successful from a marketing perspective?

• Getting supporters requires convincing people to switch allegiances. It’s much easier to market to people who have not adopted a product in the category than trying to win them over from your competitors.
• The companies that control the market set the rules and control the conversation. In the case of the election, it is nearly impossible to poll high enough to gain entry to the debates without being on that stage in the first place.  A classic Catch-22.  The establishment is designed to maintain the status quo.
• Without a base of supporters/early adopters, it’s impossible to raise the marketing budget necessary to seriously compete in an election. To get a bank loan or to attract venture capital, you need some evidence of the likely support and success of your effort.
• There’s no room for error with a product launch. You must get it right and missteps can be fatal.  Case in point was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson who couldn’t remember Aleppo and a foreign leader he admired.  Maybe they needed another candidate, a different spokesperson, a different “package” for their new product offering.

2. You should be wary in believing your internal research and your experts during periods of major change in the market. Virtually everyone was surprised with the outcome of the 2016 election.  Pollsters and reporters, who tend to lean Democrat and wish to maintain the status quo, had no clue regarding the depth of electorate frustration.  Their sampling methods were clearly wrong.

When you are disrupting the market with a new message/product, sometimes you must go with your gut.  Some of the most successful companies introduce new products we didn’t know we needed (like the smartphone) and that we now can’t live without.

3. Breaking with convention and implementing change is hard without a broad range of support. It’s one thing to get the job, as the Republicans have done.  It’s quite another to lead the team/country and gain their support once you have the job.  One of the most difficult, yet rewarding, challenges we face in business is getting a new job with marching orders (or the need) to implement change and to be successful by gaining the support of the employees in our company, department or team who are naturally resistant to this change.

Those most successful do so by getting allies, clearly articulating their vision, explaining the reasons why change is needed, keeping an open mind, listening to those who must help you implement your plan, and getting their input in designing it so it is successful.  The Republicans don’t seem to be doing this particularly well.  It’s not enough to have the votes to pass your plans.  It’s the difference between being a Manager and telling people what to do and being a Leader and involving your people in the process and getting their commitment.

4. Spokespeople and endorsers are important and the public’s perception of them matters. Companies hire likeable, respected and successful leaders and celebrity endorsers.  If they become tainted, companies move quickly to distance themselves from them (Tiger Woods?), even if that person was the reason the company was successful in the first place.  The reason is simple:  even if the product and company has not changed, has not been affected, and the rationale for buying the product or service is as strong as ever, people aren’t rational.  They don’t see beyond their perception of the spokesperson and won’t buy your product for the simple reason that they don’t like him or her.

This is affecting both parties after the election, just like it did before and during it.  Even though the Republicans were given a mandate and are implementing many good policies for the country, people are resisting and protesting just because they don’t like Trump.  And those celebrities in the media and entertainment world who are doing the protesting are tainting their personal brands and those of their employers.

5. If you don’t like your new boss, you look silly if you protest and don’t cooperate just because you didn’t get the job. Any effort you make in the marketplace or within your company needs to have a point and suggested solution.  Don’t tell me you won’t implement the strategy because you don’t like me or don’t like the direction the company is taking.  Don’t protest a leader just because you don’t like him or what preconceptions you have about him.

Have a point, protest a specific action and come up with an alternative.  It’s like the tenets of any marketing campaign.  Be specific about what you are trying to accomplish and have a call to action.

1.      Your position in the consumer’s mind is critical and can be  fatal.  Just ask Mitt Romney.  He allowed the Democrats to create a negative perception of him and the Republicans that was more powerful than the one they were trying to communicate themselves.  So Obama, who had the baggage of a failed first term, was able to deflect the flaws in his “product” and even create a counter position of him that was seen as a better alternative to the negative position he created for Romney.

2.      Public relations is a critical element in the marketing mix.  It’s no secret the press leans to the left, but give the Democrats credit.  They are adept at controlling how the news is reported.  To the general public, who generally does not understand the issues and cannot see bias in the media, what they see on the news is taken as fact.  And as every PR practitioner knows, it’s not only how stories are reported, but what stories are covered and the words used in headlines and key copy.

 3.      Unfulfilled product claims and poor product performance can be overcome by proactive, effective, well-funded marketing.  Obama, as the first black President, was going to improve race relations.  Instead a recent poll shows they have become worse from both white and black viewpoints.  He was going to unite the country, but now it is more polarized than ever.  Promises about the economy, healthcare and foreign relations have also been unfulfilled.  Yet he won a second term with a better marketing plan supported by an enormous budget.

 4.      Strong products or brands can deter competitors from launching new product alternatives.  It’s safe to say that there are enough Americans to support a third party – a huge voter segment that doesn’t identify with either party and thus doesn’t have a brand to buy.  The Democrats are too liberal and the Republicans are too conservative to many voters.  For instance, there would be significant support for a party who espoused very conservative fiscal and tax policies but was liberal on social issues such as gay and women rights.  Yet a third party never seems to make a dent in the entrenched parties and their strong brands, with their huge organizations. 

 5.      Effective and efficient use of digital marketing tactics can win in the marketplace.  To many, the story of Obama’s first election was being the first President elected by utilizing the Internet, not for being the first black President.  He built on that distinction by employing a far superior digital marketing strategy to win a second term.  He was particularly astute with his effective use of the analytical and targeting capabilities now available.  There have been several stories on the failures of Romney’s digital marketing team.  Some even postulate that they cost him the election.

 6.      It’s more important that the public face, the leader, the spokesman for your brand be likeable than competent.  People buy from and vote for people they like, not necessarily the ones who have the best product or are the most competent.  Ask anybody in sales.   Just look at recent Presidential elections:  Carter/Ford, Reagan/Carter, Reagan/Mondale, Bush I/Dukakis, Clinton/Bush I, Clinton/Dole, Bush II/Gore, Bush II/Kerry, Obama/McCain, Obama/Romney.  Whatever your political leanings, you’d have to admit the winning candidate was usually the most likeable.  The losing party did not run a very strong candidate in many cases.  We’ve even seen how Carter was more affable than Ford but not Reagan.  Same with Bush I beating Dukakis but not Clinton.  Times change, competitors change, consumer/voter preferences change.  Therefore, companies, their products and their marketing must constantly adapt to the marketplace.

1. Not listening to their customers.  How often are we asked for our opinions and feedback on how they can better serve us?  Sure we get plenty of opinion polls so our politicians know what to say to get elected, but what about our ideas on how to fix the many broken processes and agencies?  We all have plenty of stories about the terrible customer service at a local government agency that everyone knows how to fix.  We’re just never asked.  Or the local high school teacher or coach who everyone knows is destroying our children year after year but we are never asked to evaluate them.  Successful businesses have many lines of communication with their customers that have been enhanced with internet tools.  People stop supporting businesses that don’t listen to them and they die.  We don’t have a choice with dysfunctional governments except to move.
2.  Raising prices as the primary means of balancing the budget.  For businesses that have stopped being profitable and have trouble making their budgets, raising prices would likely hurt sales volume and could put them out of business.  So what do they do?  They become more operationally efficient, prune their product line, and find creative ways to generate more sales.  So why do our governments continually raise taxes and fees as their first reaction to fewer customers (a declining taxpayer base) and higher costs?  How many times have you seen them discontinue or streamline a social program, or re-engineer a process?  Instead, they raise their prices which we or obligated to pay, or move away.
3. Not articulating and executing on a clear, focused vision and mission.   To be successful in business, you need a unique selling proposition.  You have to clearly define what you can do better than your competitors within some limited parameters.  You absolutely cannot be all things to all people.  You cannot possibly do everything yourself.  Yet that’s exactly what our government tries to do, even when there are much better options and more appropriate organizations to do much of what they try to do.  We never expect one company to serve all of our needs, so why should we expect our government to do everything for us.  If anything, we find that intrusive and try to move away from companies and governments that try to control us too much.
4. Being unwilling to partner and outsource the appropriate functions.  Most successful businesses realize they do not have the expertise to do all of the critical functions they need to compete so their hire outside ad agencies, law firms, logistics providers, consultants and outsource many manufacturing and operational functions.  This gives them a higher level of competency at a lower cost than doing it themselves.  Our governments, however, seek to do everything, even when a privately-run solution would provide a better result and a lower cost.  Not only do they do too many things, they try to do them all themselves, setting up inefficient bureaucracies and processes that waste our money (that could have bought the same service much more efficiency and efficiently).  They waste taxpayer dollars in what they do and how they do it.
5. Not involving and developing employees.  Everyone, except the government, seems to know that an organization is doomed for failure if it doesn’t involve and motivate its employees.  To be successful, you need employees who take ownership in meeting goals, help solve problem (not cause them,) and go the extra mile to serve customers.  Why do you think compensation plans with incentives are so important in the private sector?  Public employees, however, get paid per the union contract and can seemingly never be fired.  You should have seen the outrage when the local teachers were going to be evaluated on all student scores, even though many students do not attend classes.  In most organizations, we are used to having goals that involve the actions of others.  Heck, it fosters innovation, cooperation, teamwork, collaboration and creates a customer focus.  If the teachers would have spent more time on solving why students aren’t coming to school and on partnering with parents to solve the problem, and less time on complaining about how unfair the evaluations were, our students would benefit and want to come to school.  So instead of involving teacher and incentivizing them to solve our number one problem of poor attendance, the school system caved in.  If you aren’t getting the education you desire, I guess you’ll have to move to a system that doesn’t value the teacher’s union more than your children.
6. Treating your best customer worse than your bad ones.  This a classic problem that most good marketing organizations have figured out:  segment your customer base and provide a higher level of service and value for your best customers and fire your bad ones.  Best Buy stopped marketing aggressively to customers who they lost money on with much success.  The government, however, continues to advertise food stamps and treat taxpayers worse than those on the public dole.  They expand and advertise welfare programs and expect the diminishing base of taxpayers to support these services for which we receive no benefit.  So with citizens on public assistance now in the majority driving the taxpayers out of town, who’s going to be left to foot the bill? 

While we can’t run our governments exactly like businesses, we can certainly employ some basic marketing principles such as being customer and employee focused and be much more effective and efficient.