I like your last point, but I still disagree. We could debate this for a long time, but I think we would have to start by establishing our nomenclature.

For example, “branding” is a term I have difficulty with. You are probably right that it (or they) are expressions of the brand. Delivery of the promise though surely has to be the customer “experience” at every touch-point and every stage in the customer lifecycle.

When I talk about marketing I see the “plan” in the context of New Model Marketing - a replacement for the “business plan” which relates to the old business model (that doesn’t place the brand at the centre and marketing in the driving seat). So you are right that “integrated marketing describes the effective execution of that promise …” but I think my visualisation might be broader than yours.

One of my areas of particular interest is applying communications skills internally. Taking a proportion of the communications budget and reasigning it, adjusting the balance of internal/external communications a little in favour of internal. I belive, and I think that it has been proven enough times by enough people, that doing so almost always increases the return.

The objective with internal marketing is to inform every employee of the promise that is inherrent in the brand, get them to buy into that and then help them understand what their role is in delivering it (because every employee at every level influences delivery). This process also inflences and alignes back office and internal support resources so that everyone in the organisation ends up with the tools to fulfill their role.

I could go on, but one observation is that this approach not only helps the client, but provides ample opportunity for any marcoms business to grow their business without getting into stuff that they just aren’t equipped for.

The process of change (that every rganisation will have to go through) is scary for organisations and more difficult the bigger you are, but my Brand Discovery Programme seems to allow organisations to make the change with the minimum of trauma. However, they don’t have much time left and its going to get tougher the later they leave it.

Anyway, keep up the good work!

First off, thanks very much for your comment, and second, here’s the link to the blog post you mentioned, since it didn’t come through in our admin panel for some reason.

By your definition, “Integrated marketing means taking all your marketing elements and making sure that they are all working efficiently and effectively together to achieve a common goal.” I think our post here is very much in line with your definition.

If one were to ask, “How do I achieve this integration?” the answer would include the three elements of consistency, planning, and connection described above.

I agree that communications is heavily featured here - as a Content Lover, I almost can’t help it. But when it comes to “integrated marketing” versus “integrated marketing communications,” I think I’d say just about the exact reverse of your comment.

More specifically, I’d say the company’s branding is the expression of a promise within an integrated marketing plan; an integrated marketing plan describes the efficient, effective execution of that promise; and integrated MarCom is the delivery of that promise.

What you are describing is “integrated marketing communcations” which is just a small corner of the world that is “integrated marketing”. You will find more on this on the post “Integrated marketing - if you don’t know what it is you probably aren’t doing it” and others at my blog, but in a nutshell:

“Integrated marketing communications” is making a promise. “Integrated marketing” is this plus delivering it! Which is where most organisations fail. You are not alone in this confusion, but missrepresentation of integrated marketing in this way is only serving to increase the confusion and ultimately therefore the failure rate.