Canadian Marketing Blog

What is Direct Marketing?

The CMA Direct Marketing Council explores and responds to various issues affecting direct marketing professionals. We recently reviewed and updated our mandate to ensure that we continue to deliver value to CMA members.

The path to this mandate led to many interesting discussions on the current state of direct marketing (DM). We looked at traditional definitions of DM and agreed it was time for an update.

The traditional definition of Direct Marketing is: a marketing discipline that seeks to elicit an action (such as an order or a request for further information) from a selected group of customers in response to a communication. The communication may be in any of a variety of media and response should be measurable.

The world of the direct marketer has changed with the proliferation of online and digital media, changes in consumer preferences and access to information, and the move towards insights-based marketing. The differentiator that DM once owned – the ability to measure results – is now a requirement for most, if not all, disciplines and media.

Taking all of this into account, the council drafted a new definition: Direct Marketing is the use of media to directly engage targeted audiences to drive profitable business results.

However, while preparing this blog to invite input from the industry, I realized that the definition needs to go one step further and expand on DM’s measurability factor.

I propose an even more refined definition:

Direct Marketing is the use of media to directly engage targeted audiences to drive profitable business results that can be tracked, recorded, analyzed and stored for future retrieval and use.

So, DM Council and CMA blog readers, what do you think?

By Rosalie McGovern, General Manager, Marketing and Business Development, Direct Marketing at Canada Post Corporation and the Chair of CMA’s Direct Marketing Council

I'm involved in DM in the U.S., so my opinion may not matter much, but I feel this is a accurate definition to use. There will always be someone that feels it is not accurate, or the words Direct Marketing should not be used at all anymore, but you can never please everyone. JDS http://www.nmoa.org

I strongly agree with this new definition. I recently came across this blurb that endorses the new definition:
"The marketing industry is undergoing a dramatic transformation. Set against a backdrop of tight budgets, increased demand for accountability, the explosion in social media and informed, active and connected consumers, marketing is moving from mass communication towards multichannel customer engagement. While consumers are driving this change, marketers also are expecting their service providers to keep up and streamline and connect the services they offer".

Good point Rosalie. I think that this is such an important aspect of direct marketing, that it would be remiss to exclude this further refinement of the "new" definition, even if the other media and disciplines are now more results focussed.

We're all direct marketers now. If what you do does not conform to the definition above, you're not going to be in business much longer.

Our industry has evolved significantly in the past five years and it is important that we promote this redefinition. On the front lines, working on exciting programs with our clients, this is intuitive but there is still considerable misconception about what Direct means today. It is our collective responsibility to help our industry and clients champion the expanded strategies that are at our disposal.

I totally agree with your definition, Rosalie. As Direct Marketers we hold ourselves to a high standard of discipline in "measurement, analysis, and using those insights to further build the business." So you are bang on in adding "future retrieval and use."

An interesting discussion and I am glad you are tackling it, Rosalie! I agree that the old definition doesn't fit very well anymore and your new one is much better. However, I guess I am wondering where "direct" starts and ends today. So many campaigns are multi-channel, multi-pronged and include traditional "direct" channels like mail and email along with mass and PR (often through online channels like social networks). I think the lines are definately blurring. Perhaps we are all just "Marketers" now.........

The element that is missing from this definition for me is measurement. It is fair to say that all media and marketing today is moving toward some level of direct engagement with the consumer. What differentiates Direct Marketing is the fact that it strives to engage consumer and instigate predetermined end-actions (directly linked to a business results) on a measured basis.

It is really direct marketing's measurement DNA (including analytics) that separates it from other marketing disciplines. I believe this should be more central to any new definition we develop.

I also agree with your definition with one suggested change to "business results that can be tracked, recorded, analyzed & stored...". I would recommend "business resuls that can be tracked, measured and provide insight to further build profitability". (I'm building on some of Mona S.'s words).

DM has come a long way from being a "below the line" marketing tactic. There are still companies, agencies included (the latter is a bit scary!!!!!) that believe that DM is just a version of junk mail (actual statement). That is why I recommend focusing the words on profitability & measurement. Measuring anything regarding business operations is a key buzz word today, so let's use it.

A mix of Direct Marketers and Marketers all commenting on a Direct Marketing post. Now THAT'S exciting!

Goody - the attempt to capture the essential notion of measurement was included in the term 'analytics'. However, in retrospect, measurement comes before the analytics stage - so I agree with your comments.

Stay tuned everyone - a new, future-forward definition of Direct Marketing is in the works!

Rosalie, I agree with your definition. In these challenging economic times, quantification of results & ROI is what it's all about!

Campaigns, programs, tactics; even within individual marketing functions these activity-related terms are used interchangeably under the assumption that everybody understands what they mean and how they figure into the overall strategy. Just as agreement and understanding of what a lead is builds consensus around the true state of a prospect, a similar language among marketers helps to maintain strategic and tactical standards. Based on numerous requests, we have identified the four most critical activity categories that B-to-B marketing functions must understand.

Campaigns: Overarching themes that drive an organization’s go-to-market strategy for a specific time period, providing it with a focused set of “rallying cries” that should generally resonate with many – if not all – targeted marketplaces. Themes will often need to be tailored to specific priority verticals or sub-verticals.

Programs: Discrete efforts that bring the core messages within a campaign to an audience, and drive a specific action or response from that audience. At a baseline, this revolves around determining which campaigns are applicable to which audiences within specific markets, be they vertical, functional or geographic (or a combination of all three) in nature.

Tactics: Are the execution elements and mechanisms that are used to deliver the components of a program portfolio, such as online events and downloadable collateral, or email and direct mail. We believe it is best to try a range of tactics that will help determine which work the best in which combinations given your targets. The “best” tactics are often a function of the specific audience you are targeting and the geography they are in.

Playbooks: Sets of guidelines that provide necessary processes for proper execution across geographies, lines of business or business units.

Rosalie, I think it's important to define the "terrain" for the term direct marketing. If you strictly talk about the direct part of marketing, I think the definition is suitable. But I believe the term has evolved to another level over the last decade to include the "relationship marketing". If you intend to widen the terrain, then I would do two things: 1. include the notion of relationship in the proposed definition and 2. consider changing the term. Good luck, this is no small task!

Thanks everyone for adding your thoughts, insights, and wisdom. At our next Council meeting we'll use this input to ensure we have definition that is representative of us all.

Bianca makes a great point regarding relationship marketing. Referring back to the revised definition - could extend out "driving profitable business results" to include with the right customers for win-win long-term business relationship.

On Goody's comment on measurement not being part of the definition, I do think the definition does include it by using such words as "tracking" and "analyzed"

"Direct Marketing is the use of media to directly engage targeted audiences to drive profitable business results that can be tracked, recorded, analyzed and stored for future retrieval and use."

I agree that the definition encompasses all media but there may be a perception issue here particularly amongst the digital folks that the two disciplines are indeed different. But I think we as the marketing community in general need to iron this one out.

One other thought is that the word 'engagement' is critical here not only in terms of how marketers engage with customers (i.e. push type actvities) but how customers engage with marketers(i.e. pull type activities). With all the new media, we may see a world where marketing needs to be more focussed on pull type activities.

Great work Rosalie. I love that it implies that the best direct marketing reflects on what's been done to inform future campaigns.