One fact is that the industry has created too many C-level titles. Another fact is that it doesn’t matter what nebulous C-level title a company invents and assigns to someone until one clearly defines the title. Another fact is that, except possibly for the salary involved, it doesn’t really matter if a business has two C-level executives where another may have just one, as long as the company culture is such that the two know to collaborate with one another very tightly.

Retailers are adapting to the shift away from right-brained “creative” and toward left-brained data mining. In some cases, that has brand marketers (and retailers) eliminating CMO roles altogether until proper parameters and expectations are set. Data and marketing are inextricably linked these days so digital and data aptitude are table stakes. At the same time, retailers have realized that they must lean on outside partnerships in order to fill gaps in capabilities and speed up innovation. Therefore the ability to coordinate and manage outside resources and take a more collaborative approach to marketing is also required. Like many things in retail, the CMO role isn’t dead, but it’s definitely going to have to be different. Think collaborative character actors rather than superstars.

You’ll remember the flirtation with eliminating the CIO role a few years back. The bottom line is that, if it’s everyone’s job, it’s no one’s job, and all these C-level titles exist for a reason.

Regardless of what you call them, every brand needs someone responsible for the entirety of the brand experience, across channels, touchpoints and experiences. I would even argue (at the risk of raising the ire of fellow commenters) that merchandising should fall under the purview of the “CMO.” Assortments, offers and promotions are the most relevant driver of brand, after all, and it has always struck me as odd that digital decisions about visual merchandising, promotions, offers and experiences are disconnected from merchandising departments.

I’ll define marketing as managing the conversation between the brand and the consumer. It’s not just talking at the consumer, it’s listening and learning. It’s interpreting the evolving landscape and evolving the conversation accordingly. It’s managing and communicating the brand promise in the manner most relevant today. None of those job functions ever disappeared, they were just named differently in a quest for clarity, both internal and external. Turns out old-fashioned marketing is not so old-fashioned — if it embraces the array of new tools that keep emerging. Long live the CMO!

The CMO role is threatened by the reality of what marketing is. Everywhere else in the company, the vagaries of the market are buffered by…the CMO. So the logistics team gets frustrated that CMOs can’t make their lives easy. Same with all other roles.

Unfortunately, facing this disconnect with the rationally logical jobs in the C-suite, CMOs have compounded their problems by embracing the flakiest ideas around marketing like influencers, going all digital, etc.

It’s healthy to see Coke understand that marketing is marketing and is critical. As uncomfortable as it is for the company to accept that the market is irrational, it’s the truth. And any company who attempts to deny truth is destined to fail.

CMO. CGO. CSO. CIO. CBSO. All these titles either create operational silos or bloated staff. Integrated thinking should be driven to the lowest possible level in an organization.

I think it’s safe to say that while the C role titles are being debated, those companies involved in strategic consulting can look forward to long and lucrative careers. As others have commented the customer experience, which starts with the brand experience, needs coverage — as it always has. The tools for communicating and working with customers have changed, but the need hasn’t.

New leadership, new strategy, new focus — very traditional CMOish, by the way. The “classic” CMO role — part pitch person, part price negotiator, part brand builder, part we’re not sure where else to dump these projects — has probably passed its sell-by date. And it shouldn’t be replaced by so-hip-it-hurts “creative” titles du jour like Chief Iconoclast or Head Brand Warrior. Marketing is moving to a much more data-driven approach, so CMOs have to wear many hats — brand builder, administrator, multi-media platform manager, agency liaison, creative, strategist, etc. It really may be too much for one person, no matter how capable. So the choices appear to be: parcel some of that work out to other departments — research, data aggregation, etc. to, say, IT; agency negotiations, but not selection, to Finance; etc., and let the CMO focus on specific tasks like brand building, media strategy, messaging, crisis response, etc.; or, divide all the work up as in the first option and have the CMO become a pure administrator coordinating the growing list of… Read more »

It doesn’t matter what you call the CMO. They can be called the CGO (Chief Growth Officer) or anything else. No matter what the title, the responsibilities of the CMO have to be picked up by someone in the organization. If there are too many Cs in the C Suite, move the responsibilities to a director level. The challenge is that the CMO role is changing as marketing changes. By the way, that’s a good thing!