Brand vs Demand is the Wrong Argument

Feels like I’m about to kick a hornet’s nest with this one, but it needs to be discussed.  

We’ve all heard (repeatedly) this argument of  “Brand vs Demand.” 

We shouldn’t be having this argument and here’s why:

1. There are no generally accepted definitions for “Brand” or “Demand” so the argument is a giant misnomer that leads to misunderstanding.
2. This argument requires the assumption that Marketing is separated cleanly into “brand” and “demand” functions – which it is not and shouldn’t be. 
3. The argument itself doesn’t provide clarity on how companies should organize, prioritize or budget their Marketing activities. It’s set up to look like it does, but because of reasons 1 and 2, it doesn’t help anyone make better decisions.

The origins of this argument probably started somewhere specifically in advertising – and even more specifically for PPC ad strategy on branded vs non-branded terms. From the advertising sphere, the debate evolved into an amorphous idea about if Marketing should be focused on brand awareness or lead/pipeline generation. That’s where this whole thing went sideways, because those are not opposing approaches, they are symbiotic ones.

Every company needs its prospects to know that it exists (aka awareness). Every company needs a method for identifying who is ready to purchase (aka lead/pipeline gen). And every company needs to sell the thing (aka sales).

There are almost an infinite number of variables that impact how effective any Marketing tactic, program or strategy will be. Market size, competitors, geography, the economy, adjacent markets, buyer personalities, time of year, brand colors, budget, the position of the moon. To debate “brand vs demand” is a flawed and irresponsible oversimplification.

Here are some more productive conversations to have within the marketing industry and within your organization:

• Target audience clarity (buyer, influencers and users).

It is shocking how we do and spend so much in GTM without really understanding and aligning on this first. Having a deep understanding of target audiences can literally make or break programs. It affects everything.

• Attribution model philosophy and tech stack alignment, and data reliability 

There are a lot of ways to think about and execute marketing attribution, but it’s never black and white because humans are still the ones buying things. What’s important is to decide as leaders what the attribution philosophy is, with clear eyes on its pros and cons, and then build the stack and processes that align with the chosen philosophy.

Also, CRM data quality is going to greatly impact any attribution success or failure. Quick show of hands – how many of you are super confident in the reliability of that data in your org?

• Defining and structuring Marketing 

The marketing industry has done a wonderful job at confusing the F out of everyone  – including itself. We have overlapping or nonsensical terminology, fuzzy operating lanes and territory fights all the time.

Think about this – if you tried to draw a venn diagram of the activities or KPIs for: Demand Gen, Performance Marketing, Revenue Marketing, and Growth Marketing … you[‘d basically have a circle. Same thing for Product Marketing, Solutions Marketing and Platform Marketing.

Getting anything done well within this chaos of language is a miracle and yet marketing teams deliver everyday. Imagine how much easier things could be if we stopped inventing and courting nonsense?