无须声光俱全的展示，光凭下面的建议，你就能够证明自己的价值，让你的同级高管们赞叹不绝。

虽然一切尽在预料中，它到底还是发生了: 首席执行官和财务官要你粉墨登场：“拿出你的绩效衡量标准，”他们下达了指令，“给我们看看营销投入的结果。”

不要担心，你并非独自一个。每个大公司和营销机构都会召开类似的高层会、碰头会、研讨会，探讨营销责任和绩效评估。这只是各个公司对营销问责长久以来不满的一种表现罢了。他们不满也是应该的。

公司的每个部门如果提出各种要求：增加投资建厂、收购一家公司或者是在什么地方开设分公司，一定要拿出这个项目的预期投资回报率。现在，营销每年都花去上百万美元，可从没拿出投资回报率的数据，它能给董事会的只是一场场华而不实的声光表演秀。

如果你奇怪为什么营销在高管中缺少尊重，或者是营销预算在第四季度开始又遭削减，这就是原因：如果你拒绝做个成年人，拿不出营销部门存在的理由，你就会继续“没有地位”，被当作个天分极高却没有责任感的小孩子。

谈到责任，你想躲也躲不掉。有两个理由：首先，每个人心里对营销报有很高的期望。大部分高管们都读过彼得·德鲁克的至理名言：商业企业具备且只具备两个基本功能：营销和创新。首席执行官们期待营销能够有效地促进公司增长。如果没有增长，效率下降，那么首席市场官的任期比锂原子半衰期还短（约两年）， 就不足为奇了。

众人瞩目营销回报率的另一个原因是，首席执行官没有其他部门可以周转现金。除了营销以外的其他部门的预算都已经减得不能再减。所以如果营销部门不能促进增长，营销开支必然会再遭削减，因为公司要为下一年的生存留住一些利润。

但是没有公司能够永远增长。为什么不换个新思路：营销必须引发增长，而且要比以往更高效的制造增长。

拥有品牌资产

作为首席市场官，现在你应该知道自己面临的问题了吧？要是不想把你的简历放到网站上去，那该怎么向首席执行官和财务官汇报营销现在的状况呢？

首先，你必须用其他高官们都理解的话语和他们沟通。你介绍的第一张幻灯片，就要给他们看思腾思特财务顾问公司做的一项出色的研究，这家公司发明了一种叫作经济增加值（eva）的概念。这是华尔街极力推崇的一种复杂的经济增加指标。每一个首席财务官都会立刻认出这张幻灯片，而且会因为你这么个做市场的人居然知道并且关心经济增加值而感到吃惊不已。

接下来展示品牌资产与eva正向相关的斯滕斯图尔特分析表，他们更是会惊喜交加。换言之，如果公司改善了消费者和客户对品牌的感知，就可以转化为可以测量的财务价值。

让某种感知或者态度来推动财务提升，这种看法也许会让首席执行官和首席财务官感到别扭。所以不光是你要不断的学习成长，他们也一样。但是记住，他们需要一点点温和的鼓励才能做到。

现在，你应该拿出“组织角色和职责”那张幻灯片了，告诉他们营销部门作为公司品牌资产的守卫是如何尽职尽责发挥作用的。守卫者这个说法完全能被他们接受，看作是营销部门的职责。当然，公司里对营销部门恶意诽谤的人会把你这一招当作是无耻的自我吹捧。但我不这么认为。

这时，你应该已经建立起了品牌资产和财务产出之间的关系。财务官和执行官肯定会要你解释如下3个问题：“为什么品牌资产会推动盈利能力？”接着问“如何测量品牌资产？”最后问：“怎么推动品牌资产？”这时候，你一定要通过回答，让他们相信你拥有品牌资产所有权。

你可以从弗雷德里克·雷奇汉的《忠诚效应》一书中找出依据。这本有关财务的著作的观点是，提升消费者的品牌忠诚度能够相应提高公司盈利能力。作者在书中使用了多个图表来证明这种关系。你可以从中挑选一张作为下一张幻灯片的内容。

一张一张幻灯片讲下去的时候，你一定要坚决地告诉他们，高品牌忠诚度是高品牌资产推动的。这个主张有几个好处：最重要的是这是事实，你可以用自己的业务来证明这个主张。

接着，你就要解释如何测量品牌资产。品牌资产意味着什么？我认为它是创新、品牌沟通和品牌接触（即客户在价值链条的每一点与品牌的接触）这些要素的集合。我相信这3个要素的重要性在每个公司、每个品牌当中都会有不同。但是，它们构成了我们思考品牌资产的框架。

如果公司的高管们专心致志地听了你的介绍，那么所有这些财务图表应该能让他们信服口服了。接下来，他们还会想知道推动公司品牌资产的动力是什么，以及如何以较低的成本实现品牌资产的提升。

投入与产出

考虑一下我们已经做了些什么。我们不再讨论每千个单位的成本是什么，也不谈每个销售电话的成本是多少，或者是广告记忆度评分（ad recall scores）。我们讨论的是智力食物链上更高的层次：品牌资产和如何通过营销强化品牌资产。换言之，我们闭口不谈投入，而开始谈论重要的产出了。我们超越了这个季度的广告预算，把它提升到更高层次，即营销在创造股东价值上可以发挥独特的、长久的作用（顺便提一句，这对你的职业生涯也是件好事）。

现在，你可以提出绩效测量设想了。我建议你讲明营销开支对目标客户和品牌资产的影响。先从你掌握的最大一笔花费开始，一笔一笔地解释。回答基本的问题：这笔开支的影响是什么？影响了多少人？成本是多少（请注意，这是产出测量法）？例如，如果最大的花费是一次贸易展览，那你就要对比参展人员在参展前后对公司品牌的评价。

如果你持之以恒又富于创新，就用“一个数字”来反映营销对品牌资产、或是诸如“品牌与众不同”等品牌特性、或者目标客户心目中品牌定位等级等等的影响。

以我的经验来看，大部分市场人员都掌握有品牌资产建设和营销开支对品牌资产影响方面的数据。但是他们大都面临同一个问题：没有品牌资产建设的流程。所以，即使可以说服首席执行官和财务官相信你有证明品牌资产与营销开支有关的测量手段，也无法让他们以及你的同事相信：你也有其他职能部门那样的系统化的流程来产生可靠、可重复的业绩成果。

营销没有把开支、品牌资产建设和提高盈利能力联系起来的可靠测量体系，这的确令人尴尬气馁。但是，这也是可以理解的。营销没有打造品牌资产的流程，就如同公司违背了忠实于股东的职业操守一样。实际上，测量体系和流程是每个业务部门绕不开、甩不掉的必要组成部分，除了营销部门以外。今天，首席执行官和财务官要你拿出测量体系，你的介绍能让他们了解你的测量设想，但是过不了多久，他们就会要你拿出品牌资产建设的流程了。

不过，那是你在另一场介绍中要谈的问题了。

（王欣红译）

here’s how to wow your c-level counterparts and prove your worth without the typical sound and lights show.

you’ve guessed it was coming, and now it’s here: a command performance for your ceo and cfo. “give us the metrics,” they demand, “to show what we are getting for our marketing dollar.”

don’t feel paranoid. youre not alone. every major business and marketing trade organization is holding a similar summit, seminar or colloquium about marketing accountability and marketing metrics. that’s the surest possible sign that the long-simmering discontent about marketing accountability has boiled over. and deservedly so.

every other function in the company presents the anticipated roi to the board when asking for capital to build a plant, acquire a company or open a branch office in the middle of nowhere. until now, marketing has spent millions every year—year in, year out—and has never had to show an roi. instead, it charms the board with a sound and lights show.

if you’re wondering why marketing lacks respect in the c-suite, if you’re wondering why marketing budgets get cut at the start of the fourth quarter, here’s a thought: if you refuse to behave like an adult and justify your existence like every other function, you will continue to “get no respect” and be treated like a talented but irresponsible child.

when it comes to accountability, you can run, but you can’t hide. there are two reasons why. first, everyone secretly has high hopes for marketing. most members of the c-suite have read peter drucker’s famous maxim that marketing and innovation are the two most important functions in business. ceos are looking to marketing to generate growth, and to do it efficiently. when there’s no growth and declining efficiency, it’s no wonder that the typical cmo’s tenure is somewhat shorter than the half-life of the lithium atom.

and there’s another reason for the sudden spotlight on the roi of marketing expenditures: the ceo has nowhere else to turn for cash. every other function has been cut to the bone. so if you can’t generate growth, marketing spending will be further reduced because the bottom line has to be fattened at least for another year.

but no company can save its way to growth forever. the new mandate: marketing must produce growth—and produce it more efficiently than ever.

owning brand equity

so now that you understand the trouble you’re in, how do you present the situation to your ceo and cfo so that you don’t need to post your résumé on monster.com?

first, you must present your case in a language that these other c-level folks understand. start your presentation by sharing with them a terrific study by the stern stewart people, who invented a concept that they call economic value added, or eva. this is a sophisticated financial approach much admired by wall street. every cfo will immediately identify with the slide. and every cfo will be stunned that a marketing guy knows or cares about eva.

your cfo will be even more shocked when the stern stewart study you present shows a direct positive correlation between brand equity and eva. in other words, if a company improves how consumers and customers feel about a brand, it can translate into measurable financial value.

one note: the ceo and cfo may become uncomfortable with the concept of allowing a feeling or attitude to drive financial results, so you’re not the only one who’s got some learning and growing to do. but remember, they may need a little gentle encouragement.

the ceo and cfo may become uncomfortable with the concept of allowing a feeling or attitude to drive financial results, so you’re not the only one who’s got some learning and growing to do. but remember, they may need a little gentle encouragement.

at this point, it’s time to pull out your “organizational roles and responsibilities” slide that shows how you function as the owner and guardian of brand equity in the company. on one level, that notion will be seen as a mature acceptance of marketing’s responsibilities. your internal detractors will, of course, see it for what it is: shameless self-promotion. but i digress.

by now, you will have established the relationship of brand equity to the financial results. you will also have assured them of your ownership of brand equity in the company. this is when the cfo and coo will want you to explain three things: “why does brand equity drive profitability?” they’ll ask. “how do you measure brand equity?” and finally, “how do you drive it?”

here’s where you draw from a book by frederick reichheld, called the loyalty effect. basically, this financially oriented book asserts that increasing consumer loyalty increases profitability. the author presents multiple charts on this. pick one and make it your next slide.

assert, as you confidently move from slide to slide, that high brand loyalty is driven by high brand equity. this assertion has several advantages—the most important of which is that it’s true, and you can probably prove it within your own business.

next, you’ll need to explain how you are measuring brand equity. what does brand equity mean to you? i think about brand equity as the sum of innovation, brand communication and of “brand touch”—one’s experiences with the brand at every point in the value chain. i believe the relative importance of these three components varies from vertical to vertical and brand to brand, but they provide an overall useful framework for thinking about brand equity.

if your c-level denizens have been paying attention, all these financial charts and graphs should have captured them by now, and they will want to know what drives brand equity for your company and how to achieve improvement at a lower cost.

inputs and outcomes

think about how far we’ve come. we’re not talking about cost per thousands anymore. we’re not talking about cost per sales call. we are not talking about the latest ad-recall score. we’re talking about something higher on the intellectual food chain: brand equity and how it is enhanced (via marketing). in other words, we’ve stopped talking about inputs and started talking about critical outputs. we have elevated the discussion beyond this quarter’s ad budget and raised it to the long-term role that marketing uniquely can play in creating shareholder value. (this, by the way, cannot be bad for your career, either.)

at this point, you’ll probably want to share your metrics vision. i suggest your vision should convey how marketing expenditures have an effect on brand equity for the target consumer. start with the largest expenditures under your control and move down to the smaller ones. answer the basic questions: what effect does this expenditure have? on how many people? at what cost? (please note that this is an output measure.) for instance, if your largest expenditure is a trade show, how do people who attend the show value your brand before and after their attendance?

if you’re persistent and creative, you can show a “one number” scale of relative effect on brand equity or some key attribute—such as a “this brand is different”measure or a rating for a simple positioning concept you wish to “own” in the mind of the target.

in my experience, most marketers have some data relevant to the general subject of brand equity building and the effect of expenditure x on enhancing that equity. but most marketers also have a very serious problem: they have no process for building brand equity. so even if you can convince your ceo and cfo that you own one of the most important drivers of shareholder wealth, and even if you can demonstrate some metrics linking marketing expenditures to brand equity enhancement, you will not be able to convince your leaders and peers that you have what the other functions have—that is, codified processes that produce reliable, repeatable results.

marketing’s lack of stable metrics that relate expenditures to building brand equity and to improving profitability is frustrating and embarrassing. but on some level, it’s also understandable. by comparison, marketing’s lack of a process to build brand equity is close to a breach of professional faith with the shareholders. in fact, metrics and process are inextricably intertwined self-reinforcing components of every internal corporate business function except marketing. today, your ceo and cfo are calling you out on metrics. the presentation you give will help align them behind your vision. and then it won’t be too long before they’ll ask for your equity building process.

but that’s for another presentation.