Communications as Ikor

IMC의 죽음         < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

“IMC (Integrated Marketing Communications)는 죽었다!”

 

이것이 오늘 글의 주제입니다.

저도 Mr. Drobis의 이 주장에 전적으로 동의합니다. 그의 주장대로 IMC가 IC(Integrated Communications)를 대체하는 의미로 사용되는 한 우리 PR인과 마케팅인들과의 차별화는 없습니다. 우리 PR직업의 아이덴티티를 살리기 위해서, 더욱 우리 커뮤니케이션 업무를 조직에서 핵심적 위치로 부상시키기 위해서.. 우리는 올바른 PR마인드로 무장해야 할 것입니다.

 

현재 많은 기업내에서 마케팅부서가 홍보부서를 포함하고 있거나, 홍보 인력들에게 큰 영향력을 미치고 있습니다. 기업주의 경영마인드가 어떠한지에 따라 물론 그 편제의 형태는 달라질 수 있겠지요. 또한 국내 주요 홍보대학원에서도 MPR이라는 이름으로 큰 바람을 일으키고 있습니다. 나름대로는 척박한 한국의 PR토양에서 파이를 키울 수 있는 하나의 몸부림이라고도 볼 수있겠습니다.

 

그러나 지금과 같은 IMC의 “과잉” 발전된 개념은 하루 속히 사라져야 합니다. 통합적 커뮤니케이션(IC)이 이루어지지 않는 한 현재의 복잡한 PR환경에서 목적을 확실히 달성할 수 있는 가능성은 극도로 제한됩니다. 이렇게 IC가 가장 중요한 PR프로그램의 전략전개 방법이라고 볼 때 IMC가 IC와 동의어로 쓰인다면 그 전체적 한계성이란 불 보듯 뻔한 것이지요… 

 

PR은 언제나 기업에게는 Reputation을 목표공중에게는 Social Goodwill을 선사해야 그 존재 가치가 있다고 항상 말씀드립니다. 기업안에서 마케팅 인력들은 해당제품의 판매증진/촉진을 목표로 보고 달릴 때, 우리는 그 옆에서 그 제품으로 인한 기업의 명성과 그 제품을 사용하는 소비자들과 기업사이의 선의를 보고 노력해야 합니다. 이러한 마인드와 시각설정이 없이 “따라가는 PR”은 이제 사라져야 한다고 감히 말씀드립니다.

 

오늘 이글은 제가 지금까지 Case Study란에 올린 100번째 글입니다. 이글을 마지막으로 저의 글올림을 얼마간 쉬려고 합니다. 그것이 얼마나 될찌는 모르겠습니다. 고이지 않는 머릿속의 그 무엇들을 긁어내는 제 손에는 어느새인가 아무것도 쥐어있지 않음을 느낍니다. 글을 쓰기 위한 글이 아니라 진정으로 여러분께 귀한 무언가를 더 물어다 드리기 위해 저는 잠깐동안 “고임의 시간”을 갖고자 합니다. 가끔씩 들어오셔서 “이녀석 아직도 시간이 남는군..”하시던 분들이 계셨다면?! 이제 좀 바쁜척하는(?) 녀석으로 다시 태어나겠습니다…^ ^  (이런 마크는 처음써봅니다..)

 

새로운 사이트가 태어나면 그때 이후 언제쯤 다시 볼 기회가 있을 것 같습니다. 가끔씩 게시판에서 대화할 시간은 가졌으면 좋겠구요…이상입니다.

 

오늘 제가 백번째로 선택한 글에서 주장하는 IMC의 죽음은 진정으로 저도 주장하고 싶은 개념적 반란입니다. 한번 되새겨 봅시다….

 

그럼 이제 100번째..홍보!! 감사합니다.

*****************************************************

 

Integrated Marketing Communications Redefined

By David R. Drobis

Journal of Integrated Communications

Volume VIII

 

Integrated marketing communications is dead. Yes, integrated marketing communications, as we have known it, is a thing of the past.

 

It died because we never could decide if it was a tool to help sell advertising and public relations agency services or if it was a true, complete communications discipline. As a result, the term “integrated marketing communications” was frequently abbreviated to “integrated communications” and came to stand for many things, but nothing in particular. Admittedly, integrated marketing communications as it was originally conceived seemed to stand for the blending of multiple forms of marketing communications. Still, given its potential for greatness, the discipline withered under the chronic stress of being misunderstood by public relations professionals, many of whom considered the role of public relations in “integrated marketing communications” too narrow. Let’s just call its cause of death “unknown.”

 

However, before mourning the loss of our old integrated friend, we can take heart in the legacy he left with us. There remains reason for hope that full and real integration of all communications disciplines needs to be achieved.

 

To be sure, we’ve had a taste of how the integration of several communications disciplines, such as public relations, advertising, direct marketing and sales promotion, can help improve marketing communications programs. But in the public relations industry, we have never fully realized how the integration process can extend beyond marketing, to blend the full spectrum of communications disciplines and help senior management best preserve a company’s corporate reputation. And this is where we as public relations professionals need to take integrated communications.

 

Perhaps it is because so much of our traditional communications business is rooted in the marketing process. Maybe it’s just because the largest communications budgets at most companies remain under the marketing umbrella. Or, it could simply be that most corporations are traditionally structured with individual departments arranged in “silos,” and there is no incentive or encouragement for these functions to coordinate with one another.

 

Whatever the case, in many companies where there isn’t effective coordination, the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing, and the lack of truly integrated communications can lead to a gradual or sudden deterioration of the company’s credibility and reputation.

 

This comes about when all audiences do not receive the same messages globally. Credibility is only derived by telling the full range of audiences the same thing in a timely fashion. Consistency is critical. Inconsistent messages create confusion, contribute to misinformation and speculation. All of this damages corporate reputations.

 

To be sure, a poor reputation brings with it serious bottom-line consequences, such as a lower stock price, sales decreases or increased resistance from regulators and special interest groups.

 

At the same time, companies are facing increasing competitive pressures; globalization, the rise of special interest influence, volatile financial markets, demanding and sophisticated consumers, a changing work force, and productivity pressures.

 

In this environment, senior managers are starting to take note of the benefits of comprehensive business strategies that incorporate communications. We now have a new opportunity to apply the concept of integration in a way that elevates communications to a higher status. And while we do not need a new term or buzzword to describe our solution, we may be able to breathe new life into the old term by giving integrated communications new meaning.

 

A NEW COMMUNICATIONS ENVIRONMENT

 

Every major corporate decision now carries with it multidimensional communications implications and messages. These messages must be delivered consistently and often on a worldwide basis. When a company makes any major decision, communications issues can be identified at every step of the process, and relevant communications strategies can then be weaved into the comprehensive business plan.

 

This is important because there has been an increase in the level of involvement certain audiences will assume when companies introduce or implement any business initiative. The best example of this is the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). It is the nation’s largest pension fund and third largest in the world, with assets totaling more than $100 billion. In addition to providing an adequate investment return for its members, CalPERS assumes a more activist role that most institutional investors have avoided. Senior managers at companies targeted by organizations like CalPERS not only have to be concerned with giving their shareholders solid financial returns, but they must also pay careful attention to corporate governance issues.

 

On the other hand, as investors become more active, companies must also recognize that America’s media consumers are more passive and skeptical than ever. While most people may have once held journalists to a higher standard than the rest of us, a recent Louis Harris poll proved differently.

 

The poll, conducted for the Center for Media and Public Affairs, revealed that 42 percent of Americans feel journalists are more arrogant than “most other people” and 50 percent felt that reporters were about as arrogant as most other people. The study also revealed that people feel journalists are as objective, biased, cynical, intelligent, compassionate, ethical and honest as most other people.

 

Senior managers face some of these same communications challenges and will have to rely on an integrated approach to communications if they are to be successful. For integrated communications to work today, the process must be built on helping senior management achieve its objectives by identifying important audiences, developing strategic and consistent messages and delivering those messages to each with maximum effectiveness.

 

If integrated communications is to stand for anything in its new life, then it must go beyond marketing; it also must encompass employee and labor relations, investor relations, government affairs, crisis and risk management, community affairs, customer service and just about any other facet of management where effective communications is a critical success factor.

 

That so many audiences need to be addressed on an almost individual basis reveals perhaps the most fundamental change that has occurred in this new communications environment. A proliferation of new media options, the emergence of new mass and personal media technologies, and a general buildup of media clutter have given targeted audiences so many options, and control over the communications process has shifted away from the sender to the receiver.