Growth Architecture, Not Dashboard Thinking
Weekend in Spain. Conversation with a senior marketing decision-maker. An explanation of signal loss triggered a series of very pointed questions:
What can we actually measure? What can't we? Where are we flying blind? Where does attribution overestimate its own impact?
As the conversation evolved toward the core questions of good marketing strategy, she articulated a remarkably clear perspective:
"I expect growth architecture from the industry. Media knowledge is a hygiene factor."
What does she mean by that? She expects a clear logic of effect. Much more than just channel plans. She demands clear answers to fundamental growth questions:
How does growth happen in my category – and what role does media play in that?
How do we increase market penetration?
How do we build brand salience?
How do we allocate budget between demand creation and demand capture?
She thinks category-first, not platform-first. "Have tech platforms shaped the agenda of an entire generation of marketers?" Too often she identifies strategic gaps when category entry point analyses, a solid understanding of buying cycles, or a clear framing of SOV vs. SOM are not properly developed – or not considered at all.
And without an overarching measurement framework, every initiative remains purely tactical. A well-considered measurement concept earns her trust – particularly when it answers these core questions:
What are our leading indicators?
What are our lagging indicators?
How do we measure incremental impact?
How do we separate demand creation from demand capture?
(On this, I recommend the post by Thomas Gregers Honoré, "The Great Reach Reset," which precisely reflects a number of the points raised here. Link in the comments.)
Why is this so critical to her? Because platform reports alone no longer earn her trust.
"Whoever only optimizes dashboards wins reports. Whoever wants to win markets needs more." Back to the Future means: from dashboard thinking back to brand management.
¡Mil gracias!