And the client's place is first at Champion Law Group. The client need that is satisfied by our service is resolution of their legal issue. We are professional problem solvers and our clients appreciate our commitment to integrity, efficiency, and humanity.
Constructing a benefit ladder for CLG clients reveals how our service features connect with our clients' benefits:
CLG's Service Attributes:
Sticking only to those that are specific and measurable, our top attributes are our competitive pricing, flexible payment plans, and wide accessibility. Our attorney's track record is outstanding - she has never lost a case in five years of practice - however, using past case results to make implications about future case outcomes gets into an ethical grey area, and given that the predominant nature of the practice is family related, we do not want to set up a "win or lose" mindset.
Functional Benefits:
Overwhelmingly, the most important functional benefit of our service is resolution of the underlying legal issue. This could mean our client's divorce is final and they can start to put it behind them (demonstrates how closely intertwined the functional and emotional benefits are), or their parenting plan is modified and they have more time with their children, or child support payments are revised or enforced, sometimes for the first time. Our practice focuses not only on resolution of the immediate legal problem, but also prevention of future legal problems by advising our clients on possible conflict points and giving advice on how to avoid them, or how to challenge them, depending on the client's wishes. We also focus on resolving problems on the lowest level possible, leaving litigation as a last resort. Every case that has gone to trial has done so only after extensive efforts to resolve the issue via alternative dispute resolution methods. This also serves our clients' interests by keeping our fees low; it is much more costly to prosecute a trial than to settle via negotiations. The costs can increase with the use of professional arbiters and the like, but it is still likely to be much more cost efficient than a trial.
Emotional Benefits:
Resolution also rules clients' emotional benefits. The promise of 1) handing over what is usually a problem of crisis proportions to a professional with the education and experience to navigate the system for you and ensure you the best possible outcome under the circumstances, plus 2) the moment when the settlement or court order is final and you can definitively say, "It's over," is enough to make many of our clients cry.
The decision-making process of our clients can be interpreted as:
Need Recognition:
This is the moment of drama: the knock at the door with a process server asking your name and handing over a large envelop. I am in the beneficial position of having been served in a personal injury suit as the result of a car accident some years ago. While I cannot stand in the client's shoes, I do know what it is like to be sitting at home with family - on Easter Sunday, no less - and get that knock at the door. This personal experience gives our firm valuable insight. Need recognition might come in others ways as well. For example, even though criminal defense is not area of law my wife practices in, you can imagine who our friends call when they have a brush with the law, usually related to alcohol-induced poor decision making. Being arrested is a fairly clear need recognition moment. Clients might also recognize the need for legal assistance if a non-cohabiting co-parent refuses to return the kids after their weekend visit, or seeing signs in kids that they might be experiencing mistreatment at the hands of the other parent or other guardian.
Information Search:
Client reports indicate that about 60% find us via personal recommendations, and about 40% via internet searches such as Google, Nolo, and Avvo. Nolo and Avvo are similar in that they are both websites that are designed to help people understand the legal system, but there are differences. Nolo is a non-profit business and is aimed at DIYers who might hire a lawyer if things get too complicated. Avvo is for profit and is aimed at those who have decided they are looking to retain a lawyer.
Evaluating Alternatives:
This obviously consists of researching and possibly consulting with other attorneys, which CLG strongly recommends that all clients do thoroughly. Choosing a lawyer is an important decision and should be made carefully. Many times, however, clients come to us in crisis and simply do not have the time or personal wherewithal to do this and just hope the first lawyer they talk to will agree to represent them.
Purchase:
In order to hire a lawyer, the client must be convinced that the problem is big enough or complicated enough to warrant the expenditure. Often, potential clients will ask Aimee's opinion of their ability to handle the case pro se. If it's reasonably feasible, Aimee can enter into a limited representation in which she merely coaches the client as he or she represents him or herself. This is much less costly to the client than full representation, but does require a lot more work on the client's part. The other prong of the decision to hire a lawyer is the initial and overall cost. For those who cannot afford it, a retainer is not required, meaning the client does not have a the large up-front cost that prevents many people from hiring an attorney. After an hourly rate is negotiated, the client and Aimee agree on a monthly amount that the client will pay until the account is satisfied. This arrangement attracts many people of moderate means furthering Aimee's goal of broadening access to justice.
Post-Purchase Behavior:
There is a fairly discreet set of post-purchase behavior the client can engage in. Either the client will recommend our firm, will say nothing about our firm, or the client will complain about our firm. Also, the client will either hire our services again, or they will not. It is assumed that positive outcomes result in happy clients, and negative outcomes result in unhappy clients, but anecdotal evidence suggests this is not the case. Client satisfaction is much more likely to be influenced by the attorney's conduct - how she speaks to clients, how often phone calls or emails go unanswered, how well the lawyer managed the client's expectations, and things of that nature. Market research through trade publications reveals "communication" to be the most important factor in client satisfaction according to their surveys.
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Friday, October 11, 2013
"Focus on competition has always been a formula for mediocrity." - Daniel Burrus
But, of course, ignoring competition altogether isn't exactly a formula for success either. Every organization needs at least occasional side-glances at their competition, and today's post is CLG's maiden voyage into the uncharted waters of competitor analysis. Because more than 75% of CLG revenues are derived from the Washington family law practice, and for administrative ease, I will limit the scope of this analysis to that area of the firm.
Like any good legal question, the first step of competitor analysis is to define the terms. And, like any recent law grad, I could make hay out of any classification inside of or outside of the designation of 'competitor' - it all depends on the definition. Clearly, CLG's competitors must include lawyers licensed to practice within Washington State. But, not all lawyers 1) are accepting new clients, and 2) practice family law. Legal specialization is becoming the norm (some argue it already is), and fewer lawyers than ever are willing to step outside their niche area. Therefore, CLG's direct competitors are Washington-licensed family law attorneys who are accepting new clients. But, from a potential client's perspective, that is not the only option for finding assistance to solve their family's legal problem. There are websites dedicated to assisting pro se (unrepresented) litigants to guide them through the court process; this is especially true with family courts. There are advocacy groups that can coach people through their pro se experience, and most attorneys perform a certain amount of pro bono (free) legal services. The individuals utilizing these services, however, are unlikely to have hired an attorney in the absence of these services anyway, and are not within CLG's target market. CLG's attorney, Aimee, has has been recognized by the WSBA every year she has been licensed for her extensive pro bono work; there's not a lot of competition in this particular market.
But, that just identifies CLG's direct competitors for new clients. We also face competition when it comes to established clients, in two different ways. First is the most obvious: an existing client is poached by another firm. I believe this has everything to do with the work we are doing and nothing to do with the other firm. There may be things we are not willing to do, of course, including violating any law or ethical rule, and if the 'other guy' is willing to, then we'd rather the client go to that lawyer, if that's the kind of firm he's looking for. The second way in which we face competition with established clients is the competition for the monthly payment. With so many of CLG's clients on a payment plan, it is inevitable that some payments will be missed. We necessarily are aware of their complete financial picture, and so when they can not make the payment, we know how genuine they are being. They, of course, know what we know and that we know, and so an avoidably-missed payment is quite rare.
Like any good legal question, the first step of competitor analysis is to define the terms. And, like any recent law grad, I could make hay out of any classification inside of or outside of the designation of 'competitor' - it all depends on the definition. Clearly, CLG's competitors must include lawyers licensed to practice within Washington State. But, not all lawyers 1) are accepting new clients, and 2) practice family law. Legal specialization is becoming the norm (some argue it already is), and fewer lawyers than ever are willing to step outside their niche area. Therefore, CLG's direct competitors are Washington-licensed family law attorneys who are accepting new clients. But, from a potential client's perspective, that is not the only option for finding assistance to solve their family's legal problem. There are websites dedicated to assisting pro se (unrepresented) litigants to guide them through the court process; this is especially true with family courts. There are advocacy groups that can coach people through their pro se experience, and most attorneys perform a certain amount of pro bono (free) legal services. The individuals utilizing these services, however, are unlikely to have hired an attorney in the absence of these services anyway, and are not within CLG's target market. CLG's attorney, Aimee, has has been recognized by the WSBA every year she has been licensed for her extensive pro bono work; there's not a lot of competition in this particular market.
But, that just identifies CLG's direct competitors for new clients. We also face competition when it comes to established clients, in two different ways. First is the most obvious: an existing client is poached by another firm. I believe this has everything to do with the work we are doing and nothing to do with the other firm. There may be things we are not willing to do, of course, including violating any law or ethical rule, and if the 'other guy' is willing to, then we'd rather the client go to that lawyer, if that's the kind of firm he's looking for. The second way in which we face competition with established clients is the competition for the monthly payment. With so many of CLG's clients on a payment plan, it is inevitable that some payments will be missed. We necessarily are aware of their complete financial picture, and so when they can not make the payment, we know how genuine they are being. They, of course, know what we know and that we know, and so an avoidably-missed payment is quite rare.
Friday, October 4, 2013
CLG Goes SLEPTC
This week's post is a SLEPTC analysis of Champion Law Group. That is, a look at the Social, Legal, Economic, Political, Technological, and Competitive factors that affect the firm's operation in some way, and a stab at what the effects of each are.
A quick overview of our little firm: It started in 2008 in Tacoma, Washington when my wife Aimee was admitted to the Washington Bar. While it was a general civil practice, by far the majority of clients came to Aimee with an issue involving Family Law. Two years later when I received a scholarship to law school in Massachusetts, the firm moved with us but the practice remained centered there. Aimee maintained clients in Washington and served them from Massachusetts, traveling back to Tacoma as court appearances required. Phone, email, text messaging, and Skype are all ways Aimee connected with her clients. While in Massachusetts, Aimee began working on local immigration cases and became a certified Veterans' Affairs lawyer. Because both of these areas of law deal exclusively with an administrative agency, a lawyer must be admitted to a Bar but not necessarily the Bar of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer is practicing. Other than Aimee the attorney, CLG has one paralegal in Tacoma and myself, the business manager.
SOCIAL
Scores of studies show the divorce rate is increasing over time and so is the rate of children born outside of marriage. Both of these factors increase the need for legal services in the areas of divorce settlement and litigation, parenting plan agreements and modification, and child support plans.
The increase of states recognizing same-sex marriages (as both Washington and Massachusetts do) creates a temporary, if in fact long lasting, swell of legal work associated with longtime couples and families transition to the formalities of a legally-recognized marriage.
Immigration patterns are a factor that impacts an immigration firm. However, at this time such a small percentage of revenue is derived from immigration work we cannot even track a causal relationship to larger patterns.
LEGAL
When I was brainstorming this post I actually wrote "all of them" under Legal. As a law firm, it is hard to imagine a legal factor that doesn't impact CLG at least tangentially, even in a seemingly unrelated area of law. But to get specific, first, there are the Rules of Professional Responsibility. And while these are not 'laws' in the same way a statute or a court order is a law, they are the laws that govern a lawyer's working, and to some extent personal, life. A lawyer can violate these Rules at any time, even if the activity has nothing to do with the practice of law and she was not acting in her role as a lawyer.
Second, change in laws. In law school, we are taught very little Black Letter Law (translation: this is what the law is, black and white, unchanging and universal) because there is very little Black Letter Law. Laws change regularly, which is why we are taught how to do legal research and case analysis. Every high court opinion, every session of the legislature represents the very real possibility of a major change in the current law and you have to go learn it all over again.
ECONOMIC
Seeing as how we've been in a down economy for the entire life of the firm, I had no trouble ticking off factors that effect CLG's operations. It occurred to me that the combined effect of all the factors of a down economy is twofold: One, legal needs increase during down economies. People get laid off, businesses go under, people lose their homes, marriages fall apart, tempers shorten...you get the idea. But, what's so handy about it is that while it's increasing people's legal needs, it's simultaneously decreasing their ability to pay for these services.
This in turn creates a problem for the lawyer. CLG's lawyer is a social-justice oriented bleeding heart who very much wants to help the people who need it. Combined, these factors result in a retainer rarely being required, and flexible payment plans with low monthly payments and no interest. While it is possible, with enough clients, to create profitability there is an obvious tipping point: Aimee cannot take on more clients than she can competently handle.
This results in two distinct problems I am currently working on. The first is that firm growth is stagnated because there are no surplus funds to plow back into it, and second, the firm does not have the ability to absorb the cost of litigation to prosecute potentially lucrative cases.
POLITICAL
Political factors are most felt in the immigration and VA cases. For example, for a short time it looked like comprehensive immigration would be passed this legislative session, so much so that an immigration lawyer with whom Aimee formerly associated advised clients to wait to file their applications until after the overhaul package passed. As we can see now, immigration reform passing has less than a positive outlook.
TECHNOLOGICAL
Law has a love-hate relationship with technology, more so than other professions I think. The Luddite lawyer is commonplace, but so it the lawyer desperate to control office clutter and work more efficiently. Tablet-based firms are popping up and the implications of cloud storage are discussed at more and more Bar Association meetings. Springfield's tornado destroyed more than a few client files at downtown law offices, and those attorneys are subject to a review by the Board of Bar Overseers to determine if they had adequate safeguards in place to protect their clients' interests; if they didn't they are subject to discipline. The cloud people were very pleased with themselves.
Technology affects our firm in other ways as well. The success of websites like Legal Zoom (talk about innovation!) and Rocket Lawyer make it easy for people to complete simple legal procedures like executing a will or incorporating a business without an actual lawyer involved. I think that these are mostly people who would not have used a lawyer anyway, but it may not remain the case.
Technology also creates the ability to be accessible literally all of the time. As I mentioned, Aimee does a lot of Family Law involving custody issues. This means she has to be available nights, weekends, and holidays because this is when custody-sharing parents transfer kids and that has a way of creating the need for one or both to call their lawyers.
Technology also creates evidentiary issues inside the courtroom and out. How to authenticate an email or text message in order to get it admitted has been giving judges and lawyers headaches since email began (or, actually, a few years after email began. It takes a while for new things to work their way into the legal system, after all, these are people who reference 19th century writings regularly.) In the office, Aimee and I just discussed whether a client could text message an authorization for a disclosure of protected information. It would be acceptable to do it via email and when you really look at it, there is not much difference. They are both writings transmitted electronically and both have attendant problems of identity verification.
COMPETITIVE
This is an area that still needs to be developed for CLG. As I've mentioned, our pricing plans mean that we have more potential clients than we can take on and living in Massachusetts means there's not much opportunity to socialize with other lawyers in the field.
The most obvious competitive factor to affect us is pricing. The Rules require that a lawyer's fees be "reasonable" and there are articulated factors that can or should be considered, like difficulty of case, lawyer's ability and reputation, etc. But to really know what is reasonable, you have to know what others are charging for similar work.
A quick overview of our little firm: It started in 2008 in Tacoma, Washington when my wife Aimee was admitted to the Washington Bar. While it was a general civil practice, by far the majority of clients came to Aimee with an issue involving Family Law. Two years later when I received a scholarship to law school in Massachusetts, the firm moved with us but the practice remained centered there. Aimee maintained clients in Washington and served them from Massachusetts, traveling back to Tacoma as court appearances required. Phone, email, text messaging, and Skype are all ways Aimee connected with her clients. While in Massachusetts, Aimee began working on local immigration cases and became a certified Veterans' Affairs lawyer. Because both of these areas of law deal exclusively with an administrative agency, a lawyer must be admitted to a Bar but not necessarily the Bar of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer is practicing. Other than Aimee the attorney, CLG has one paralegal in Tacoma and myself, the business manager.
SOCIAL
Scores of studies show the divorce rate is increasing over time and so is the rate of children born outside of marriage. Both of these factors increase the need for legal services in the areas of divorce settlement and litigation, parenting plan agreements and modification, and child support plans.
The increase of states recognizing same-sex marriages (as both Washington and Massachusetts do) creates a temporary, if in fact long lasting, swell of legal work associated with longtime couples and families transition to the formalities of a legally-recognized marriage.
Immigration patterns are a factor that impacts an immigration firm. However, at this time such a small percentage of revenue is derived from immigration work we cannot even track a causal relationship to larger patterns.
LEGAL
When I was brainstorming this post I actually wrote "all of them" under Legal. As a law firm, it is hard to imagine a legal factor that doesn't impact CLG at least tangentially, even in a seemingly unrelated area of law. But to get specific, first, there are the Rules of Professional Responsibility. And while these are not 'laws' in the same way a statute or a court order is a law, they are the laws that govern a lawyer's working, and to some extent personal, life. A lawyer can violate these Rules at any time, even if the activity has nothing to do with the practice of law and she was not acting in her role as a lawyer.
Second, change in laws. In law school, we are taught very little Black Letter Law (translation: this is what the law is, black and white, unchanging and universal) because there is very little Black Letter Law. Laws change regularly, which is why we are taught how to do legal research and case analysis. Every high court opinion, every session of the legislature represents the very real possibility of a major change in the current law and you have to go learn it all over again.
ECONOMIC
Seeing as how we've been in a down economy for the entire life of the firm, I had no trouble ticking off factors that effect CLG's operations. It occurred to me that the combined effect of all the factors of a down economy is twofold: One, legal needs increase during down economies. People get laid off, businesses go under, people lose their homes, marriages fall apart, tempers shorten...you get the idea. But, what's so handy about it is that while it's increasing people's legal needs, it's simultaneously decreasing their ability to pay for these services.
This in turn creates a problem for the lawyer. CLG's lawyer is a social-justice oriented bleeding heart who very much wants to help the people who need it. Combined, these factors result in a retainer rarely being required, and flexible payment plans with low monthly payments and no interest. While it is possible, with enough clients, to create profitability there is an obvious tipping point: Aimee cannot take on more clients than she can competently handle.
This results in two distinct problems I am currently working on. The first is that firm growth is stagnated because there are no surplus funds to plow back into it, and second, the firm does not have the ability to absorb the cost of litigation to prosecute potentially lucrative cases.
POLITICAL
Political factors are most felt in the immigration and VA cases. For example, for a short time it looked like comprehensive immigration would be passed this legislative session, so much so that an immigration lawyer with whom Aimee formerly associated advised clients to wait to file their applications until after the overhaul package passed. As we can see now, immigration reform passing has less than a positive outlook.
TECHNOLOGICAL
Law has a love-hate relationship with technology, more so than other professions I think. The Luddite lawyer is commonplace, but so it the lawyer desperate to control office clutter and work more efficiently. Tablet-based firms are popping up and the implications of cloud storage are discussed at more and more Bar Association meetings. Springfield's tornado destroyed more than a few client files at downtown law offices, and those attorneys are subject to a review by the Board of Bar Overseers to determine if they had adequate safeguards in place to protect their clients' interests; if they didn't they are subject to discipline. The cloud people were very pleased with themselves.
Technology affects our firm in other ways as well. The success of websites like Legal Zoom (talk about innovation!) and Rocket Lawyer make it easy for people to complete simple legal procedures like executing a will or incorporating a business without an actual lawyer involved. I think that these are mostly people who would not have used a lawyer anyway, but it may not remain the case.
Technology also creates the ability to be accessible literally all of the time. As I mentioned, Aimee does a lot of Family Law involving custody issues. This means she has to be available nights, weekends, and holidays because this is when custody-sharing parents transfer kids and that has a way of creating the need for one or both to call their lawyers.
Technology also creates evidentiary issues inside the courtroom and out. How to authenticate an email or text message in order to get it admitted has been giving judges and lawyers headaches since email began (or, actually, a few years after email began. It takes a while for new things to work their way into the legal system, after all, these are people who reference 19th century writings regularly.) In the office, Aimee and I just discussed whether a client could text message an authorization for a disclosure of protected information. It would be acceptable to do it via email and when you really look at it, there is not much difference. They are both writings transmitted electronically and both have attendant problems of identity verification.
COMPETITIVE
This is an area that still needs to be developed for CLG. As I've mentioned, our pricing plans mean that we have more potential clients than we can take on and living in Massachusetts means there's not much opportunity to socialize with other lawyers in the field.
The most obvious competitive factor to affect us is pricing. The Rules require that a lawyer's fees be "reasonable" and there are articulated factors that can or should be considered, like difficulty of case, lawyer's ability and reputation, etc. But to really know what is reasonable, you have to know what others are charging for similar work.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
The Market Orientation of CLG
The organization I work for is a very small law firm, consisting of one attorney, one paralegal, and myself, the business manager. In the Chalk Talk, we learned that market orientation has three components: 1) customer focus 2) competitor focus 3) cross functional teams. The "lifeblood" of market orientation is market research.
Our firm, Champion Law Group, is strongly client focused. The Bar Association as well as most attorneys would frown upon legal clients being referred to as customers. Indeed, many attorneys bristle at the idea of law being a "business" at all. The firm's attorney is very much in touch with what clients and potential clients need. To that end, in light of current economic circumstances, a retainer is rarely required and flexible payment plans substantially increase legal access for those who might not otherwise have it.
The firm is not very competitor focused. This is mostly due to the abundance of clients; by waving the retainer and allowing payment plans we have more potential clients than we could possibly take on.
As for cross-functional teams, in a three-person organization we really can't help but have cross functional teams, while we all have our own areas of responsibility, and there are some things only the attorney can do.
Market research has been largely ignored, again due to the abundance of clients. As it is my plan to grow this firm, this is not an area that can be ignored much longer.
As for how my colleagues would respond to some of Drucker's ideas, I have been thinking about that quite a bit since beginning Cohen's book. The idea that the goal of business is not profit maximization resonates strongly in this firm. Having an explicit goal of profit maximization might even violate the Rules of Professional Responsibility, which could result in our attorney being disciplined by the Bar Association. However, the proposition that the goal of our business is to create a customer/client does not sit well either. Lawyers are essentially professional problem solvers (and professional secret keepers) and so "creating a client" could be interpreted as creating problems the lawyer then must be paid to solve. It may seem like semantics, but most licensing jurisdictions' Rules of Professional Responsibility allow an attorney to be disciplined for doing something that creates the appearance of impropriety; actual wrongdoing need not be proven.
The mission of CLG is to solve clients' problems with integrity, efficiency, and humanity. Perhaps we could adapt Drucker's principle to the goal of our business being to create repeat clients. That gets us closer to what would be acceptable in the legal world, however I think the problem is with the word "create". There is an argument that it reasonably implies the lawyer is somehow contriving client problems to increase the lawyer's fee, which is partly what the Rules aim to punish. Remember the standard is the appearance of impropriety not actual wrongdoing.
While word choice is very important to a lawyer, I do not think Drucker would worry too much about the exact verbiage. I think that what he was getting at is that businesses ought to be people-focused and not money-focused. This dovetails nicely with the mission of CLG.
Our firm, Champion Law Group, is strongly client focused. The Bar Association as well as most attorneys would frown upon legal clients being referred to as customers. Indeed, many attorneys bristle at the idea of law being a "business" at all. The firm's attorney is very much in touch with what clients and potential clients need. To that end, in light of current economic circumstances, a retainer is rarely required and flexible payment plans substantially increase legal access for those who might not otherwise have it.
The firm is not very competitor focused. This is mostly due to the abundance of clients; by waving the retainer and allowing payment plans we have more potential clients than we could possibly take on.
As for cross-functional teams, in a three-person organization we really can't help but have cross functional teams, while we all have our own areas of responsibility, and there are some things only the attorney can do.
Market research has been largely ignored, again due to the abundance of clients. As it is my plan to grow this firm, this is not an area that can be ignored much longer.
As for how my colleagues would respond to some of Drucker's ideas, I have been thinking about that quite a bit since beginning Cohen's book. The idea that the goal of business is not profit maximization resonates strongly in this firm. Having an explicit goal of profit maximization might even violate the Rules of Professional Responsibility, which could result in our attorney being disciplined by the Bar Association. However, the proposition that the goal of our business is to create a customer/client does not sit well either. Lawyers are essentially professional problem solvers (and professional secret keepers) and so "creating a client" could be interpreted as creating problems the lawyer then must be paid to solve. It may seem like semantics, but most licensing jurisdictions' Rules of Professional Responsibility allow an attorney to be disciplined for doing something that creates the appearance of impropriety; actual wrongdoing need not be proven.
The mission of CLG is to solve clients' problems with integrity, efficiency, and humanity. Perhaps we could adapt Drucker's principle to the goal of our business being to create repeat clients. That gets us closer to what would be acceptable in the legal world, however I think the problem is with the word "create". There is an argument that it reasonably implies the lawyer is somehow contriving client problems to increase the lawyer's fee, which is partly what the Rules aim to punish. Remember the standard is the appearance of impropriety not actual wrongdoing.
While word choice is very important to a lawyer, I do not think Drucker would worry too much about the exact verbiage. I think that what he was getting at is that businesses ought to be people-focused and not money-focused. This dovetails nicely with the mission of CLG.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
My Understanding of Marketing
As I begin this Marketing class, I have been thinking about what exactly marketing is. I have understood that marketing and selling are not the same thing, but I thought marketing is more closely related than Drucker on Marketing explains. I conceptualized it as selling being the act of having the product or service a customer wants when they want it and then convincing them to pay the price you are asking. Whereas marketing is better described as the as the actions taken to create consumer demand for the product or service you are then going to sell.
Drucker makes it clear this is not the case, though his conception of what lay people consider selling and marketing are not exactly what I thought them to be. I wanted to see what other people think marketing is, so I looked up a couple different definitions. The American Marketing Association defines it as "Marketing is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large." (http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/DefinitionofMarketing.aspx) While Investopedia defines it as "The activities of a company associated with buying and selling a product or service. It includes advertising, selling and delivering products to people. People who work in marketing departments of companies try to get the attention of target audiences by using slogans, packaging design, celebrity endorsements and general media exposure. The four 'Ps' of marketing are product, place, price and promotion."
If Drucker's definition of marketing can be summed up as "creating a customer" then I think that my own as well as the two definitions above are not so far away from his thinking. I think Drucker saw great importance in keeping the focus away from profit maximization and on creating customers. At first glance it seems like splitting hairs; after all, you are creating a customer so that person will give you their money. From their money comes your profit. But 'creating a customer' humanizes the process in a way that 'profit maximization' cannot, and even can be diametrical to.
Drucker makes it clear this is not the case, though his conception of what lay people consider selling and marketing are not exactly what I thought them to be. I wanted to see what other people think marketing is, so I looked up a couple different definitions. The American Marketing Association defines it as "Marketing is the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large." (http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/DefinitionofMarketing.aspx) While Investopedia defines it as "The activities of a company associated with buying and selling a product or service. It includes advertising, selling and delivering products to people. People who work in marketing departments of companies try to get the attention of target audiences by using slogans, packaging design, celebrity endorsements and general media exposure. The four 'Ps' of marketing are product, place, price and promotion."
If Drucker's definition of marketing can be summed up as "creating a customer" then I think that my own as well as the two definitions above are not so far away from his thinking. I think Drucker saw great importance in keeping the focus away from profit maximization and on creating customers. At first glance it seems like splitting hairs; after all, you are creating a customer so that person will give you their money. From their money comes your profit. But 'creating a customer' humanizes the process in a way that 'profit maximization' cannot, and even can be diametrical to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)