Blogs

Keys to the Success (or Failure) of Marketing Plans

By David Marlowe posted 01-15-2019 02:56 PM

  
In Health Care Marketing Plans That Work we look at the key reasons why marketing plans succeed or fail. Some of the nearly dozen reasons examined include:

  • The degree to which the marketing plan is coordinated with the organization’s strategic plan and critical business plans.

  • The resources required to support the marketing plan are not available or are not made available.

  • The marketing plan is based upon flawed data or a poor interpretation of that data.

Perhaps the most critical success or failure factor for any marketing plan is the degree to which the organization prioritizes the usage of marketing resources and then is able to stand by those priority decisions. This blog will examine the issue of establishing priorities as part of a marketing plan effort.

Marketing plans often involve two distinct levels of prioritization. The first is at the organizational strategic level, where some programs or services are designated as high priority (or A-level) and some are designated as having a lower priority (or B-level). Often this designation is based on a relatively involved prioritization model using three to five key criteria (such as profitability, market potential and ease of access) and a set of value levels for each criterion. But it is fair to say that in many organizations there is also a notable degree of political consideration that goes into the determination of which service is an A and which is a B priority.

From a marketing-resources usage perspective, A-level services have access to the full spectrum of support elements while B-level services are usually limited to maintenance-level support using existing channels (such as the organization’s website or an existing electronic or print newsletter). 

While the A-level and B-level approach works for planning purposes, the very concept of these labels can create a challenge. Few clinical or management leaders like to believe that their program or service is a B player. So occasionally some organizations will attempt to soften if the designation by using other terminology. In one case the A-level services were labeled as market leaders, and the B-level services were labeled as market supporters. It is debatable if this really changed anything, but it might be worth a try if it helps reduce resistance to planning efforts.

The second level of prioritization for a marketing plan is at the market action or tactical level.  Here the designation used is first- and second-priority actions with the following definitions for each:

  • First-priority market actions: Actions that must be completed in the fiscal year covered by the marketing plan, unless there are significant reasons to make a change in priority level or to drop/delay the action.
  • Second-priority market actions: Actions that would be helpful to the organization or service line/program if implemented in the fiscal year covered by the marketing plan but which will not result in any notable problems if not implemented.


The process and criteria used to determine first- and second-priority levels for annual market actions is usually less involved than the approach often used for strategic-priority levels. Factors often considered include available resources, the readiness of the service for marketing support, and the readiness of the marketing function to provide the specific tactical support (e.g., the new CRM capability won’t be up and running until June 20XX).

There is no absolute, industry-wide guideline as to the best ratio of first-priority actions to second-priority actions. Clearly everything can’t be a first priority, or there really is no purpose in having a priority structure for a marketing plan. Experience shows that a reasonably effective ratio is about 75 to 80 percent first-priority actions and 20 to 50 percent second-priority actions.

By David Marlowe | Posted January 15, 2019
Principle
Strategic Marketing Concepts
Ellicott City, Maryland

Marketing_Plans_That_Work_promo.png

0 comments
58 views

Permalink