Quote:
Ace, I'm not sure I'm subscribing to your thoughts about, "You can't position a thought any more than you can position a company or product." After all, companies spend a massive %age of the marketing budget telling the world at-large why it's tough to live without their product or service (some much better than others admittedly).
It's true, Pat, that they spend the money, and, yes it's true that many of them think they are buying positioning. What they are buying is advertising, which may or may not contribute to their market doing the positioning.
The first time I ever heard the word "positioning", one of the first in a trend that followed that made nouns into verbs, and verbs into nouns, to create buzzwords (think "impact") was in 1974, and I learned it from a media rep who went on to achieve bigger and better opportunities in the same field selling broadcast advertising. Ries and Trout had written their classic business book on the subject. At that time, I thought that positioning in the market could be achieved in a linear and effective manner. Perhaps I confused it, like so many others, with "branding". As time went on, I was influenced by people like advertising expert Roy Williams, who made me accept that the market itself was the final determinate for who would win the battle for its mind--not the dollars spent. Chaos theory over game theory if you will.
A nineteenth century English author named Richard Jeffries once wrote,
"Never, never rest contented with any circle of ideas, but always be certain that a wider one is still possible."
I like the word "deeper" better than "wider", but I'm very much in harmony with that. I take these things seriously, and beyond the armchair, because it's my very own pocketbook that has been funding that marketing, telling my story to my segment of the world at large.
It never hurts to go one step further with knowledge we think we have under our belt.
Back to the main topic and you offered:
"When the numbers were off, and a peer from finance, admin, or marketing would put the blame on sales, I would invite them to take over a patch for one week."
In the particular article I quoted, the reference to "Sales' Abysmal Closing Ratios" had a context in support of the author's denigrating ("abysmal" is a denigrating adjective.) the use of sales methodologies different than the one she trains in. To me, that would encompass the majority of all salespeople, because only a minority are trained in her method. So--I guess I'm asking through this thread whether her supporting claim is valid and/or accurate. I really want opinions. -Ace Coldiron
Warmest Regards -MPrince