Richard Moran

Founder of SourceandQuote.com

At one time, Marketing was always viewed more as art than a science.
Do you agreed? Is it still an art, or is science a bigger part of Marketing today?
Posted 4 months ago | Reply Privately

Comments (95)
1. Les Stern
President at L. Stern & Associates and Owner, L. Stern & Associates

See all Les’s activity »

Stop following Follow Les

Interesting question. When I present on marketing, and in marketing classes I

have taught, I define marketing as "The art and science of making sure you have
what your customers want, and then making sure your customers want what you
have."

So my answer is it is both and it always will be a combination. Not sure it is more

science today than it has been, but technology has allowed the science piece to
become more advanced and has allowed us to practice the science of marketing
more efficiently.

Posted 4 months ago | Reply Privately

2.

Kathleen Schaub
Vice President of Marketing, Sybase

See all Kathleen’s activity »

Stop following Follow Kathleen

I'd like to reframe your question, Richard. I don't think the choice is between art
and science.

Marketing is a social discipline. Marketing is about persuading people to change.

A prospect uses someone else's product - or none at all - and you want them to
use yours instead. Importantly, people rarely make decisions as individuals. A
person's decision-making process, and their likelihood of change, is a heavily-
influenced group/social process.
 Perhaps if you substitute the word "wicked", for "art", the question would be more
accurate. "Wicked problem" is a term used in social planning and design.
Wikipedia defines a "wicked problem" as one "that is difficult or impossible to
solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are
often difficult to recognize. Moreover, because of complex interdependencies, the
effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other
problems."

Wicked problems aren't like math problems. Math problems have an answer, even
if we don't know the answer. You can manage a wicked problem to a better
outcome, but you can't solve it.

Science helps manage wicked problems. We are increasingly applying scientific

methods (data collection, hypothesis development and testing, reproducible
methodology, full disclosure, etc.) to marketing. This clarity gives us tools for
improvement. I think marketer in today's world that isn't aggressively using
"science" is leaving big opportunities on the table.

Marketing remains a "wicked problem" due to its complex, social, nature - and the
application of science and methodology specific to these kinds of problems is
producing better results and making those results more predictable.

Posted 4 months ago | Reply Privately

3.

Dick Lee
Founder & Principal, High-Yield Methods

See all Dick’s activity »

Stop following Follow Dick

Fundamentally, the capability of maketing to persuade customers to change

behavior is rapidly declining. Marketing has to change from proactive to reactive
mode, for the most part. And the reactive stance requires much less "art" and
much more "science," which will eventually repopulate marketing departments
with more left-brained folks.

Posted 4 months ago | Reply Privately

4.

Alina Caballero
Marketing at CBA
 See all Alina’s activity »

Stop following Follow Alina

I believe this question is similar to 'How long is a piece of string?' question.

Marketing is a combination that requires both art and science, as we all know. By
framing it as 'art' or 'science' we both restrict our creative thoughts and ideas and
impact the actual development of the field by creating this rigid view of one OR
another, instead of one AND another.

I agree with Les that marketing is art and science combined. Depending on the
certain step in a marketing campaign, the focus is on the art side or the science
can play a bigger role. We need science to make sure we have the right target
market, to undertake the SWOT, etc but we need art to create the message and
promote it.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

5. Richard Moran
Founder of SourceandQuote.com

See all Richard’s activity »

Stop following Follow Richard

I think it is a subject that will always be debated. It is interesting to read

everybody's opinion on this subject. Stats are great, but I hope the art of
marketing remains a greater mix in the process.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

6.

Keven Ellison
Vice President, Consumer Online Marketing at Selling Source LLC

See all Keven’s activity »

Stop following Follow Keven

yes the debate will continue... I believe it to be both art and science, just like how
"form and function" go hand in hand. Marketing can be classified as an art form
on how messaging, campaigns and strategy are applied and then a science as
how data is analyzed to monitor and measure results. Then both reapplied to the
condition to enhance results. Overall, I would call the whole process, when done
successfully is a trure form of art!

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

7.

Guy Smith
Principal, Silicon Strategies Marketing

See all Guy’s activity »

Stop following Follow Guy

The continuum from the extremes of „art‟ and „science‟ are similar to those
between „magic‟ and „technology‟, and as Clark correctly said “Any sufficiently
advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

The amount of „art‟ required to market a product is based mainly on how much or
how little science is involved. Here at Silicon Strategies Marketing we do a lot of
primary research for clients (lately I have dreamt survey instrument designs in my
sleep). The more hard data one has about markets, buyer motivations, etc., the
less one has to rely on art (and, yes, there is a diminishing rate of return in
research, so art will always be part of the mix).

If one takes market research/mapping/planning as a quantitative process, and

combines that with measurable marketing campaign management, then the
degree of science dominates. This being said, someone with a non-quantitative
idea about a market based on having personally spoken with a significant number
of buyers, will market based on art – his/her impressions and opinions … and they
may well succeed.

So, the answer to the original question is „yes‟.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

8.

Melissa Albano
President at Grapevine Consulting

See all Melissa’s activity »

Stop following Follow Melissa

I would take a different approach to the topic. Marketing, while supported by art
and science, is truly dependent on sociology. Understanding the behaviors that
make people think and act a certain way will allow a marketer to truly understand
and communicate with their audience.

It is this understanding of sociology that is shaping the way we communicate with

 companies today in the digital world. Although none of this would be possible
without technology, and it wouldn't be visually appealing to us without art, the real
shift change is in the way companies are now expected to act as individuals and
communicate with their markets.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

9.

Dan Damaschin
Senior Marketing Professional

See all Dan’s activity »

Stop following Follow Dan

Marketing is a science in that it requires a good understanding of psychology and

sociology - to understand how people think and why they behave they way do; it
requires analytical skills - to be able to look at research or planning data and
detect trends and patterns; it requires solid financial understanding to be able to
make sense of a P&L sheet and decide what makes true business sense, etc.

Marketing is an art in the way it turns all the above hard data and knowledge into
creative, interesting, intelligent, catchy, humorous or shocking, impactful
messages and campaigns that stick to people's minds and drive a change in
behaviour.

So, it's both. Where the emphasis is depends on each company's internal culture,
systems, processes and capabilities and the truly successful companies should
excel at both.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

10.

Mitul Mehta
Head - Marketing at Mastek Ltd

See all Mitul’s activity »

Stop following Follow Mitul

It depends on how frequently and to what depth an organization wants to measure

returns on Marketing investments. Higher the frequency and depth, more the
Science.

Some organizations treat marketing as a "support function" where as some view it

 as "the core purpose of business". For example - Nike, Harley Davidson, Apple are
more in the business of brands than products.

- Mitul

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

11.

Viktor Ollari
editor-in-chief at Hungarian Security Magazine (MBT)

See all Viktor’s activity »

Stop following Follow Viktor

It's like war. Art and science at the same time. But(!) the focus is on that certain
person who carries it out. That person makes marketing science/art/legerdemain
or hanky-panky.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

12. Fred Smuda

Owner, ResearchLink Partners and Marketing Consultant

See all Fred’s activity »

Stop following Follow Fred

Whether marketing is based in the social sciences or simply having sufficient

behavioral data available (sales data, ROI models, competitive intelligence or
primary customer research) there is a science component to marketing. The
fundational information for understanding consumer or B2B customer wants and
needs is available through a variety of source. The challenge is extrapolating
seemingly unrelated insights into the AHA point of discovery. That is a function of
marketing intuition, experience, creativity and guts. Developing the strategic
approach is for marketing and communications is also pretty much driven by the
data available. The art is creating the specific tactical executions to achieve your
business objectives. Read Kevin Clancy's book "Your Gut is Still not Smarter than
Your Brain" for a better unerststanding of how art and science are codependant.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

13.

Ana Kekezi
 Marketing Director at Vizion Plus TV

See all Ana’s activity »

Stop following Follow Ana

for sure it's mostly art or maybe a human science... we want to amaze our
customers, we want to make them live a fairytale ... science is cold is figures that
help us out or better invented by the management of companies: being so fixed
on figures and numbers ... AND we still see that even though science is
implemented on marketing we can't never be sure on final figures

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

14.

Mariane Maffeo
Communication Arts for the Information Age

See all Mariane’s activity »

Stop following Follow Mariane

Marketing has always been considered a science, since it is based upon analytics
and results. Advertising is an art and a science, since it is based upon creativity
and results. Just my two cents.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

15.

Paul Peterson
Social Media and SEO/SEM Consultant

See all Paul’s activity »

Stop following Follow Paul

While I believe in the creative artistic side is important to successful marketing, I

think marketing is a science because to be effective, it needs to follow the
scientific method. The scientific method is the process of developing a
hypothesis, testing that hypothesis, measuring the results, and then confirming or
disproving the hypothesis. The creative art comes in during the first step -
creating the hypothesis. Creativity and art also play a dominant role in in the
second step: testing the hypothesis. This testing is the execution of the
campaign, and how the campaign is designed relies heavily on artistic creativity.
But successful marketing then hinges on the next step: measuring results. If you
 can measure results of your campaign (preferably quantified in dollars) then you
can either run the campaign again to repeat the success or try something else (a
new hypothesis based on results of the last experiment) and the cycle starts
again. Because effective marketing uses this scientific model, if forced to choose
only one, I would classify marketing as a science.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

16.

Neville Pokroy
Principal, Mastermind Solutions Inc. and Marketing and Advertising Consultant

See all Neville’s activity »

Stop following Follow Neville

I think marketing is both, depending on what area of marketing you are looking at.
Branding and positioning are two areas of marketing that are more of an art.
Digital is moving marketing into the science space in a big way.

In many ways, the answer to the question depends on how well the marketing has
been planned. If you undertake digital on an ad hoc basis, and you have not set up
the "science/analytical" portion, then it is an "art" - simply because one has failed
to take advantage of the science part that is available. So process and intent are
two additional contributing factors to this discussion.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

17.

Joe Lethert
CEO at Performark Inc

See all Joe’s activity »

Stop following Follow Joe

I'd say more science, but there is an art to practicing science.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

18.

Dick Lee
 Founder & Principal, High-Yield Methods

See all Dick’s activity »

Stop following Follow Dick

Hard for me to believe today but I was once CEO of a marketing agency that
gained traction and credibility in a tough agency market (Twin Cities). Among my
pet peeves was the agency approach to creative thinking and finding "the big
idea." I used to liken it to putting a bunch of creatives in a conference room;
giving them unlimited supplies of M&Ms to ingest; waiting for the suger high to
kick in; at which point they'd start bouncing of walls and each other; until two
loose wires connected creating a spark; at which point "the big idea" was born.

Creativity is only as effective as the fact and knowledge base it's built upon, and I
don't mean just data. That's science. So is the planning process that melds all the
inputs and sequences planning steps and the introduction of inputs. So is the
logical framework that identifies opportunities to add value to customers. The
creative piece comes last - and we're continually amazed at the creativity of back
office people such as HR and IT that participate in planning sessions in finding
new methods of adding customer value. The information accruel and planning
process are key, but the most untended. Creativity is the easy part.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

19.

Dean Moothart
B2B Sales & Marketing BPO Expert

See all Dean’s activity »

Stop following Follow Dean

Too many organizations treat their marketing as just an art. Strategic decisions
are often based on anecdotal evidence or "gut instinct" and there is not enough
measurement and analytics.

Posted 3 months ago | Reply Privately

20.

Dave Taylor
President, Taylor Brand Group

See all Dave’s activity »

Stop following Follow Dave

Great comments from everyone. I'll lob in another perspective and that is to break
it down a bit by elements. Some parts of marketing are more science/measurable,
others less so. A sales promotion should be more measurable and trackable.
Brand concept and equity less so. Measuring actual behavior is more scientific,
but measuring emotions (the core of any brand) not so easily measured. Market
psychology is so often counter-intuitive, but there are an increasing number of
tools to track and manage the process. So marketing is still a balance of art and
science, but the art and the science are evolving based on the tools and trends of
human communication, interaction and behavior. (Sounds a lot like Melissa's
comment on sociology to me.)