Old-School Tactics in a Digital World

In 2007, I placed an advertising insert in a Sunday edition of the Boston Globe aimed at parents throughout the region. It was right there in the plastic wrap in between P&G coupons, and the weekly Stop and Shop circular. As a result of executing this tactic, the increase in engagement was exponential. My target audience was primarily moms of children in Boston Public Schools and surrounding school districts. The action was beyond successful as was an accompanying series of radio promotions and door-to-door canvassing. There was nothing digital. Everything was paper-based and information was primarily disseminated in person using grocery store subs and sodas to lure parents in. Any additional outreach was done by snail mail. Digital communication had no place in the strategy and we still more than tripled our program enrollment as a result of these efforts. 

I still have a physical rolodex on my desk and continue to desire physical business cards from new connections to write notes on the back that will remind me who that person is (like I was taught back in J-school). My combination of modern approaches to marketing and communication along with my nostalgia of old-school ways allow me to achieve engagement across generations, no matter how much I will always love a good ole’ coil-bound planner. 

With all the changes in what works to get a message out and to inspire recipients to answer calls to action, can any of those antiquated ways still be successful? Or, are the days of flyers stuffed into print versions of newspapers and door-to-door promotion of services now completely in the past? Instead of trying to reach decision-makers by email, I clearly remember sitting outside of offices for hours figuring that at some point, the person would need to go to the bathroom and I’d catch them then– nothing replaced me hounding a school principal in-person as opposed to sending a slew of emails that could be immediately deleted. I don’t see that anymore…granted, I don’t think any school would allow me to camp out in a hallway for hours, but you get the picture. 

So much has changed, or maybe just evolved. And, it’s more than just the takeover of AI, it’s simply a mass exodus of interest in one-to-one communication and authentic human interaction. That interaction was key to my success 15-20 years ago, and I still sprinkle some of that in as I work to build relationships, tell stories, help clients increase sales, and help families access services and tools that help their children succeed. Until they are fully extinct, that rolodex will remain open on my desk and updated with new business cards with “wearing a blue suit with a purple tie” on the back.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF MARCOMM

Across the country, we’re witnessing a quiet but dangerous trend: marketing and communications teams are being cut, often first as organizations tighten their budgets. It’s happening in the nonprofit sector at alarming rates, and increasingly, for-profits are following suit. I’ve been pondering these questions in the face of so many cuts across the nation, especially as it relates to nonprofits– but for-profits aren’t immune to this issue either.

So, I start by asking, is this an economic issue, or a reflection of how little value leaders now place on marketing and communications?

What I’m pointing to is the evolution of the role of MarComm experts/teams/departments in organizations. More and more, we’re learning that marketing and communications departments are among the first teams to be slashed when organizations seek to downside. Similar trends are beginning to emerge in the private sector, but the termination of positions in this space has become more commonplace in nonprofit organizations of all sizes. While this shift creates opportunities for agencies like Turnkey, it’s still frightening to witness the undervaluing of marketing, communications, public relations, and advertising.

Along with the purging of talent in this field, we’re also seeing an ongoing practice of paying professionals in this space less than colleagues in other departments. In recent conversations with a nonprofit leader, she confirmed that the organization allocates less funding for salaries in her MarComm department, prioritizing compensation for the organization’s development team.

It’s understandable that groups–especially in this nation’s political and financial climate– the task of securing funding is more competitive and a bigger priority in nonprofit organizations than it ever has been. However, leaders can be shortsided and fail to understand that without proper brand recognition, message amplification, and curated and strategic storytelling, funders won’t know or value the company enough to want to invest in.

MarComm departments tell the organization’s story, persuade target audiences to answer calls to action, and create the interest and roadmap to strategically take people through a defined funnel of engagement. The forecast for the future of in-house MarComm leadership and support doesn’t instill confidence among MarComm professionals that this trend could turn around anytime soon. As departments and teams disappear, teams like Turnkey will be there to fill those voids, but it seems that the investment in even bringing in outside support for these services is far from what it should be to truly maximize audience cultivation and the impact that we all want to see come out of our work.