Marketing Students guilty of negligence?

Marketing BooksAs a marketing graduate I read with interest David Meerman Scott’s views on how many marketing professors could be guilty of malpractice in the way they teach the subject.

Part of me agreed, I remember in a tutor group session explaining Chasm Theory to my fellow students and the lecturer. But then I thought ‘how come I knew about Chasm Theory and other students didn’t?’

The answer is simple – and this advice holds for students of any subject: read around your subject. Voraciously. Find online discussion groups (this was 1996, I was on Guy Kawasaki’s Rules for Revolutionaries mailing list and the contact with real-life tech-savvy marketers was invaluable and inspiring to me). Nowadays there are many more forums, mailing lists and groups to get involved in. Authors, like David and Seth Godin have blogs so you can keep up with what they’re thinking about in-between books. Not that one has to wait long for something to read these days; it seems there’s a new ‘New Marketing’ or Social Media Marketing book published every week. The biggest problem is keeping on top of all this material.

For this reason I would have to disagree, marketing professors shouldn’t be sued for malpractice – they teach to a course, a curriculum set well in advance and based on a course prospectus. I get that the text books are long in the tooth, I think it’s great that David’s New Rules of Marketing & PR is on the reading list for a number of marketing programmes, it should be on more. So should Purple Cow. And How to Drive the Competition Crazy, because the marketing set texts are dry and stuffy. The practice of marketing on the other hand is not – it’s the lifeblood of an organisation. Books that encourage you to try something new, be remarkable and give recent real-world case studies prove that.

Is there still a place for Kotler?

Absolutely. A lot of Marketing Management is just common sense couched in academic terms, but it needs to be ingested. Some of it just begs to be overturned (one of my favourite essay approaches was using contemporary case studies to prove a particular assumption wrong) but for a book like ‘New Rules’ to make any sense, don’t you have to know what the old rules are? Don’t you need an idea of what kind of predictable moves the competition are likely to make? (Admittedly an assumption on my part – that the competitor’s marketing team are still running on Marketing 1.0.)

Shiny object syndrome

The presenters of the marketing podcast Marketing Over Coffee often refer to ‘Shiny object syndrome’ – the way that some people obsess over the latest new toy/social network/location-based game. There’s a danger in pursuing the shiny object too fervently. if marketing lecturers had spent a semester teaching Second Life, a few years back, how would those students feel about that module now? I was taught basic HTML as part of my marketing course. It was somewhat superfluous for me, but for the rest of the class? At least they understand the difference between H1 and P tags. If the lecturer had taught Pagemill (yes I’m that old) instead, how much use would those lessons be now?

What to do?

I was impressed to learn that my alma mater now includes real-world marketing experience as part of the course. Students are, under adult supervision, given a small budget to market a local business. Assignments like this will favour students that read around and are familiar with the more efficient methods that Marketing 2.0 brings. Universities could provide recommended reading lists, but that takes away the initiative from the student. Marketing students ought to be mavericks, railing against the hegemony of Kotler et al. Anyone who isn’t is doomed to play by the old rules. Any student that doesn’t take their education seriously and relies on their professors for all their learning is themselves negligent. So what’s the answer? Drum home the message READ AROUND YOUR SUBJECT!

Image credit: Hubspot via Creative Commons on Flickr.

  • davidmeermanscott

    Charles — interesting to look at this from the student's perspective. Many thanks for taking my post and expanding it.

    Sure there is room for some “classical marketing” courses.

    However, I really don't think we're talking bright shiny object when it comes to the overall program. I think we're talking about a fundamental way that people communicate.

    I simply cannot get around the fact that all (or nearly all) students use Facebook and IM to communicate with classmates. I have no doubt that study groups form and trade assignments via Facebook.

    And armed with that knowledge of communications, I think if programs do not include this sort of marketing, if they ignore what's going down and fail to adapt then they guilty of malpractice.

  • http://www.charlesneville.com/ charlesneville

    Thank you for replying here David.

    A lot of the time when you have people teaching a vocational subject, like marketing, but really any subject where a lack of real-world exposure is detrimental, this situation arises. The solution is a mixture of student-led initiatives, teaching staff who stay current or better still guest lecturers – marketers and consultants, preferably who can teach from their own experiences not the same old Zappos/Dell/Comcast/Kogi's BBQ case studies.

    These could be taught for half a semester at the end of each academic year under the banner of 'where marketing is now' or 'the current state of the art'. It would be great to throw in some crisis communications sessions too. We all learn about SWOT & PEST analyses but how much time is given to handling the 'stuff has hit the fan' moment? The biggest hurdle would be convincing the university establishment to accept a teaching module for which the content doesn't exist at the start of the year.

    With regard to using technology like social networks to teach, I don't know if that goes on but platforms like Ning or something education market specific would seem the best fit.