One of my strategic objectives this year is to get closer to the boards of some of our large clients. It should be clear to all of us in search that the companies winning the search game are those prepared to think about it most strategically. If nothing else, the trends towards brands performing increasingly well (as discussed eloquently by Aaron recently) reflects changes to the underlying algorithms and / or an increasing sophistication from (some) big brands when it comes to search.
I have a bunch of posts to write about how brands can position themselves to benefit from this and also how agencies can work alongside them (clue: agencies - think about how you support internal efforts rather than outsourcing).
But this isn't one of those posts. There is an element of advice for agency-side and in-house SEOs at the end, but you're gonna have to wade through a load of speculatin' first. Good luck!
The hypothesis
At the moment, most people running large companies (think: Fortune 500, FTSE 100) are, by training and inclination, either:
- Lawyers
- Economists
- Accountants
There are a (noisy) few who are engineers or who worked their way up from the 'shop floor', but this post is less about them.
When large companies are looking for a safe pair of hands to steer these companies, they seem to seek out people who understand the flow of money (can I put lawyers in that category? Sorry - couldn't resist).
My hypothesis is:
In 30 years' time, the people running these large companies will be those who understand the unchecked flow of information - the marketers - and more specifically that technically-inclined breed of marketers currently only found in search
The great thing about a prediction as bold as that is that I can't be proved wrong for 30 years!
Why on earth do I think that?
The face of business is changing. Forces are being exerted on large businesses that they have never had to contend with before. Large businesses feel invincible - we have a tendency to think that the ones we see now will be around pretty-much-unchanged in 30 years' time. This is not likely. In most 30 year periods there is significant 'creative destruction'. Even those businesses that look superficially the same will have had to adapt to survive.
At the moment, the biggest impacts are being seen on the businesses that have moved online quickest (retail and media) but we are increasingly seeing impacts on consumer brands that don't operate online as the internet becomes the place where consumers - especially younger consumers - hang out. As this generation of net-savvy consumers become the buyers and managers in businesses of all sizes, we will see the internet have an increasing impact on the way business is done.
We have already seen effects on the web development and search industry as the early-adopter CEOs increasingly base B2B buying decisions on search (and, yes, on twitter - is it actually possible to write a blog post without mentioning twitter at the moment?). As this spreads more widely (and I'm confident that it will), even traditionally boring B2B businesses will need to treat the web with a new marketer mentality. They are not well-equipped to do this - the boards typically understand the flow of money better than they understand the flow of information.
The first thing I anticipate is big-company marketing directors being recruited out of the digital industries. If I were the chairman of Ford or Barclays, I'd do something like the following: buy a digital agency (optional), install the CEO as marketing director, ???, profit.
Lest anyone think I am seeking this role myself, Distilled is not for sale, and I don't want to be marketing director of a big company, unless you're offering *obscene* money ;)
If I'm right about this, I think the effective ones will push their companies to market in much more strategic ways - they will be changing the way they do business in order to change the way they get business. It's but a small step from there to the corner office.
What does this have to do with SEO?
Sometimes I write here on SEOmoz about pure technical SEO stuff. Sometimes I bore you with business thoughts.
This post is supposed to get you thinking about the future of agencies and the future roles for individuals with the kind of experience we have.
In the long-run, I believe that in-house is going to rule when it comes to large companies, but with a place for specialist external advisers. If you run an agency:
- it is going to be increasingly important to support and complement in-house efforts and teams
- you are going to be dealing with increasingly savvy clients
- you will have to change the way you approach, and sell to, big businesses
- you could have an opportunity to take your digital skills into the running of bigger businesses (in the long-run)
If you are in-house:
- you should expect your bosses to increasingly come from the same world you do
- your career progression could (if you want it to) take you out of 'digital' (and certainly out of technical) and towards the comms and strategy teams
- you can aim for the C-suite after all...
Once again, I find myself ending a potentially controversial post by asking if you agree? Disagree? Think I'm an idiot? In either of the first two cases, I'd love to hear your thoughts...
If you liked this post, you might like some posts by Alex (Tom's old boss at Bloom): I was partly inspired to write this post by his thoughts on a new agency model and he also wrote a challenging YOUmoz post recently asking if SEO agencies should exist.
Awesome, love it.
Hopefully, this top-down (CEO's) and bottom-up (marketers) increase in online savvyness will squeeze out the cowboys and lead to an all round improvement for the reputation of online marketers.
Spot on Will! and i totally agree with the sentiment of this post. I think if you take a step back even further, this rolls into the cycle of Big Co board being led by Marketeers/Sales Directors in times of growth and then reverting back to "money men" when the growth needs consolodation and restructure.
I think in this context it is inevitable that the when the company looks for growth and in turn to individuals that will position the buisiness as 'market led' (another big change from the 'product led' businesses of yester year) that in the rise and rise of digital, a background in our indusrty will be seen as essential. How else will Big Co position itself in its market when its route to market is increasingly digital. However I would argue that in the same way Big Co didnt set up inhouse TV advert production teams, they will recognise that the best place for ideas to flurish is in their agencies, but they must be competant in this sector to make the right choices about which agencies they work with.
You've fuelled my own thought process about this again and i feel a blog post coming on ;-)
Our industry is coming of age and this type of post and this type of discussion is a sure indicator of the challenges and opportunites that lie ahead for us! bring it!
I'm a little undecided about this one.
I think I understand what it is you're driving at, however Marketing Directors (for my money at least) need to understand more than just the digital marketplace.
Whilst online is a key part of the marketing mix, for the majority of companies it is not the be all and end all.
Traditional marketing theory is primarily concerned with finding an optimum mix of activity. Ordinarily you'll find that an integrated campaign e.g. a mix of more traditional 'brand' advertising - Online Banner Advertising, TV, & Press Advertising combined with say PPC & SEO will perform better than either 'brand' alone or PPC and SEO alone.
I agree completely, that there are many large corporations who do need to wake up to the importance of digital, as they are potentially missing out on a lot of opportunities; but I think that we need to be careful not to over inflate the importance of digital ourselves.
You are of course right, but I think the point here is that whilst in past digital could sit on the 'outside' of marketing, this is no longer the case, to be a digital marketeer is to understand all of the channels you mention and the marketing mix.
Almost every peice of offline marketing communication has a digital consequence (just look at a clients web stats when their TV campaign is running). The question is whether you want a marketeer with a bit of an understanding of digital or whether to be a marketeer in the future and lead Big Co you need to be a digital marketeer with the understanding of offline marketing I mention above. I guess its all about balance and how important digital is (or should be) to that particular Big Co. Increasingly Digital is moving up the pecking order but you are right that wont suit every business.
That's spot on Hannah.
In my experience here in Canada there is a real lack of marketers who understand the skills required to succeed in traditional marketing while still having a firm grasp on the technical aspects of marketing and branding online.
Those of us who understand the bigger picture on just how traditional media, new media, SEO and SEM relate to each other are going to have a greater influence on company strategies in the future....At least that's what i hope!
You're completely right that it's only one bit of the skillset that is needed. That's part of the reason why I made my prediction for 30 years' time! I think that people developing skills in our industry will, by then, have learnt about a lot of the other things they need to know. You make good points though - and I may be guilty of a little hyperbole in the interest of starting discussion... Sorry about that.
Not at all - I think for the sake of debate, you really needed to!
I would also imagine that routes to market will have changed significantly in 30 years time!
I can't wait to tell my grandchildren about 'shops' - buildings made of bricks and mortar, staffed by human beings. You went in walked around, picked up the things that you liked, then walked to the till and paid for them, sometimes with cash, sometimes with little plastic cards...
Adding scale-able SEO consulting advice to large business so that they can modify their internal processes to be SEO-friendly is where I see Distilled adding the most benefit at the moment. If you can break into the company and talk to the right people then you can add really significant benefit to their bottom line.
One of the key challenges I see is in making a business case for changes and defining ROI of SEO activity. In order to get big business to DO anything you need to state ROI in black and white which is often hard to do If you can crack that problem then you're onto a winner.
totally agree Tom, we're seeing clients recruit for positions in reputation management, blog management and making major changes to their business processes to enable them to react to the information we are feeding in to their businesses. Increasingly their back office systems roll back MI that clearly evaluates the ROI we contribute to the business.. it is still rare with only a couple of our clients really cracking it and letting us 'break in' but those that have are seeing huge returns.
That's exactly what we're seeing too - those that are doing it are seeing the benefits but trying to nail down exact ROI ahead of time can be a bit of a headache sometimes!
yes its often a c'*k on the block moment.. you can do all the forecasts you like but ultimately its often a leap of faith for the client until you have some real data to refine the model
I think you have a really strong case here Will. I was discussing the potential impact of giving an exec board a set of SEO KPI's with a group of friends yesterday. There's definitely more of a need for an understanding of our science at the highest level, so what better to put your top traffikers at the top of the food chain. Historically in many companies the "top sales guy" inherited the role of chief exec / MD, so why wouldn't the "top traffic guy" get a shot in the near future?
Large businesses feel invincible - we have a tendency to think that the ones we see now will be around pretty-much-unchanged in 30 years' time.
Amen. Not only is that trend going to continue, it seems clear that it's accelerating. It's amazing to me how often we look at a big company in our industry (Google being the prime example) and assume they'll be around forever and that the industry is unchanging. Given that the public internet is barely 15 years old (in terms of common usage) and modern search is just over 10 years old, the companies that rule the game now will be replaced more than once in most of our lifetimes. Burying our heads in the sand about that fact will only mean missed opportunities.
Great post Will,I was looking for what this reminded me of and its this Times Article from the director of Tesco.com - essentially saying the future CEO's will be people from the online department. Now having worked in-house I'm inclined to agree with this and your argument.
Whilst lawyers, accountants and economists are "safe hands" - the digital team at most big companies and organizations have to learn
Whilst an element of pride in being an inhouse/digital person is at play here, (with all of us likely) I still see a strong future for us to look at.
Also to understand the impact of marketing, sales and promotions on the sale cycle is something SEO's are very well placed to understand and take that idea offline and higher up!
As to how - I think increasingly inhouse will be a major part of brands and companies - but these inhouse people will rely on agencies for particular projects or "grunt" work.
So to your last 3 points as inhouse:
My boss - is IT director, the ones beyond him all created the companies (final one up is Murdoch himself)
Career progression - I'm the key link between marketing, PR and IT - so certainly see that continuing and a good area to aim.
C-suite, certainly for COI and CTO level theres an argument that those doing inhouse SEO now would be the perfect candidates to understand it better!
Just my 2pence!
Forget about KPI's, any c-level officer needs to hear how digital marketing affects their bottom line, what sort of "credit" gets afforded the company with added visbility in search engines, editorial websites and how reputation can be bolstered along with brand recognition through well planned and executed digital marketing campaigns.
As an SEO, it's clear that concepts both visual and anecdotal help to educate C-levels, while affording you as the tactician or team lead the buy in to move ahead with more risky or expansive maneuvers.
Clearly each person has their own motivations at that level in business, but the clear an simple constant is WIFM (What's in it for me).
I think you and Alex share a vision that is impossible to deny, although there will be swathes of opposition in the shorter term from within the big companies this would ultimately help.
The other factor is of course the new big companies that come along (as part of the 'creative destruction' you mention); these upstart startups will grow bigger quicker because they will instictively build online into their processes. Technological advancements will only cement this.
Hi Will,
Apologies for the unusual length of my comment, but as you will see I sit business side as a former CEO and current MD & Chairman. I wanted therefore to provide a perspective on your post form that side.
I currently run my own business practice providing coaching, mentoring & strategic management services to MD/CEO’s. As part of this practice, I am Chairman of Bloom Media (whom I know you know). I also Chair another e-commerce business and am past CEO of a technology business which I led onto a stock exchange listing.
I am also a former engineer and sales and marketing director spending time in heavy engineering and within a US semiconductor business as my path to where I am now at. Being thus ‘formed’ as a business leader, my ‘education’ as to the power of the internet has therefore been funded over the last 3 years.
I say all this merely to provide some perspective on my following comments related to your blog; after being encouraged by Alex Craven to ‘engage’!
First of all, I believe your comment about the need for the traditional CEO to change is absolutely spot-on. You are also correct that most of them have migrated to the ‘top’ via the traditional financially dominated route and therefore carry that ‘negative’ bias which also gives them a major ‘blind spot’ related to the web ‘black-box’.
However, the change you speak of as being in need has been happening for quite some while; for well over 25 years in fact!! The current recessionary pressures and banking chaos was actually predicted way back then. However, the change required is so profound (albeit cultural as opposed to difficult) that the ‘powers that be’ resisted its imperative. It’s a very sad indictment of the financial dominance of western business that such change has been seriously impeded. My own business practice ‘preaches’ such conversion and if you look at the Bloom Media website you will see video messages and blog articles from myself and Alex (MD) which are also basically preaching such change. IT MUST HAPPEN.
I also believe that the current credit crunch driven recession will FORCE such change as it coincides with the biggest ‘technology and technique’ shift to hit business practice since ‘steam’ ie the Internet. The Dot-com boom really is now with us, but this time its not fed by financial frenzy and greed and therefore has a solid foundation on which to launch. The other critical mass factor is that it is self-feeding and will, I believe be exponential in its growth.
Take a look at the topical blogs on my website as well as some of the papers and presentation (all on the home page at www.perfmgmt.co.uk) and you will see where I am coming from and why I believe, as a non-financially biased business leader, your perception is totally right.
So, yes I accept that I took a non-traditional route to business leadership and therefore being non-financial I am not contaminated with such a bean counter mind-set. However, I also agree that such mind-sets must engage pro-actively with change as a business imperative if they are to survive personally let alone their enterprise. What bigger motivation can they have?!!
The real challenge however is not just that CEO’s must grab hold of this change and embrace the challenge, but also that the whole enterprise culture must change to engage with the benefits the Internet has to offer. That also requires financial institutions, and government legislation has to change to keep pace …. A tall order perhaps, but a challenge that none of us can duck.
I continuously find myself repeating Dr Demings comment; “No one has to change. Survival is Optional” It seems particularly apt right now!
Excellent post Will and something that (as Alex and Tom have noted above) we are constantly thinking about. I won't repeat what's been said already however this is the kind of thinking that will take our industry forward and enable our clients to take digital more seriously.
It's not just meta tags and a couple of links any more ;)
It's definitely an interesting thought, and exciting for digital marketing professionals. With the way the economy is today, it's time to get the right people in the C-level suites making the executive decisions. The only caution flag I would throw is my hopes that the digital marketing industry will have an educational program in place qualifying these individuals. I don't believe all that much in certification-based titles (i.e. CPA), although they are a good merit for a "qualified-professional." It'll be interesting to see if the search industry develops some sort of certification. Good post, and THANKS!
I think Hannah makes a great point.
Having worked at the C-level in some major corporations, I've found that market research, segmentation, competitive analysis, etc. are areas of most companies which are vastly under-funded and underutilized. C-level types love to be able to quote this information, but are rarely willing to pay to do an adequate job.
SEO / SEM will fall under marketing-related activities in most companies, and, hopefully, get out of IT.
I believe there will be opportunities for agencies to supplement internal departments, since, as stated, these will be under-funded.
Good post. I definitely agree with your sentiments and its clear that in a tough market being able to demonstrate an awareness of the financials is going to win some extra trust.
I just got round to reading Aaron's Feb 25th post on brand emphasis in search, quite heavily related to some some of the comments here, especially in regards to future SEO.
Interesting post Will. I have been thinking alot lately about providing training and support services to larger companies that do (or could) have an in-house staff. During a recent meeting with a major health care provider, the question was brought up of working with and training their staff so that they could "help themselves". Another current proposal I have out is one where I would be training their in-house Techie to assist with most of the project. I feel that this is going to be a major element of digital agencies in the near future.
Online marketing is blend and mix of ideas of all level of professionals - from top level executives, online marketers, marketers to move you up from the baseline. Great Post!!!
Will I love this post, this is one of my greatest obstacles that i face every day. Not only internally but with clients as well. I think that the really big compaines of the world are aware and are working towards it by building online communities and participating at a greater rate in the conversation.
Its not the big fish that eats the small fish.. Its the fast fish that eats the slow fish.. Change change or die.
Being an inhouse SEO means having to deal with a lot of corporate sh#t and less with SEO issues per se. If you are genuinely interested in SEO and not corporate sh#t then your career goals should not be any managerial positions. As for CEOs - first of all they should have trust in the people who work for them. Managing people is all about delegating and much less about knowing everything your subordinates are supposed to be doing.