oyalty
97
“Loyalty” is an old-fashioned word describing being deeply commit-
ted to one’s country, family, or friends. It came into marketing with
the term brand loyalty. But can people be loyal to a brand? Tony
O’Reilly, former CEO of H. J. Heinz, proposed this test of brand
loyalty: “My acid test . . . is whether a housewife, intending to
buy Heinz tomato ketchup in a store, finding it to be out of
stock, will walk out of the store to buy it elsewhere.”
That some people will be exceptionally loyal to some brands is
incontrovertible. The Harley Davidson motorcycle owner won’t
switch even if convinced that another brand performs better. Apple
Macintosh users won’t switch to Microsoft even if they could gain
some advantages. BMW fans won’t switch to Mercedes. We say that a
company enjoys high brand loyalty when a sizable number of its cus-
tomers won’t switch.
Brand loyalty is roughly indicated by the company’s customer
retention rate. The average firm loses half its customers in less than
five years. Firms with high brand loyalty may lose not more than 20
percent of their customers in five years. But a high retention rate may
indicate other things than loyalty. Some customers stay on because of
inertia or indifference or being held hostage to long-term contracts.
Building loyal customers requires a company to discriminate.
We are not talking about racial, religious, or gender discrimination.
We are talking about discriminating between profitable and unprof-
itable customers. No company can be expected to pay the same at-
tention to an unprofitable customer as to a profitable customer.
Smart companies define the types of customers they are seeking who
would most benefit from the firm’s offerings; these customers are the
most likely to stay loyal. And loyal customers pay back the company
in long-term cash flows and in generating a stream of referrals.

and build. Accomplish more, and do it in new areas, with
fewer resources.”
Everyone in a company has a different agenda. The advertising
manager sees the company’s salvation as being in more advertising;
the sales manager wants more salespeople; the sales promotion
manager wants more money for incentives; and the R&D depart-
ment wants more money for product improvement and new prod-
uct development.
The problem is that if every department only does its own
job well, the company will fail. Departments have individual agen-
das, not company agendas. The gift of reengineering thinking is
to switch the focus away from departments toward managing
core processes. Each core process—product development, cus-
tomer attraction and retention, order fulfillment—requires team-
work from several departments. Increasingly major company
initiatives are launched as interdisciplinary team projects, not de-
partment projects.
Management must never relax its vigilance. Business is a
race without a finishing line. Andrew Grove, former CEO of
Intel, postulated Grove’s Law, “Only the paranoid survive.” But
the Japanese see management’s task more positively and call
it kaizen: “Improving everything all the time by everyone.”
They would rather improve their business every day than pray for
an occasional breakthrough. The company that stops getting bet-
ter gets worse.
At the same time, improving the efficiency of the current opera-
tions is not enough. Defining good management in this way has
caused many businesses to fold. Management puts the company at
risk by staying indoors and not wandering out. In viewing the busi-
ness from inside out rather than from outside in, they miss changes in

suppliers, and intellectual knowledge including patents, trademarks,
and copyrights.
You need to go further and list your core competencies and core
processes as assets. Any special skills and proprietary processes are
assets. Strategy is essentially the way a company chooses to link its
competencies, core processes, and other assets to win marketplace
battles.
At the same time, don’t limit your search for opportunities by
starting with your assets and resources. First look outside the firm for
Marketing Assets and Resources
101
your opportunities, and then see if you have or can attract the needed
resources and competencies. I have always been impressed with 3M’s
willingness to go after a promising opportunity even if it lacked the
requisite resources. You can always buy or outsource them.
arketing
Department Interfaces
Each company department carries images or stereotypes of the other
departments. Most often they are not flattering. Furthermore, the
departments compete for the available resources, each making the
case that it can spend the money better. All this interferes with har-
monious working relations between departments.
Some members of other departments will stereotype the mar-
keting department as consisting of fast-talking salespeople who cajole
a large budget from management without providing any evidence of
its impact, as con men who snare customers with a dishonest pitch,
or as hucksters pressing R&D for new bells and whistles rather than
for real product improvements.
One engineer complained that the salespeople are “always pro-
tecting the customer and not thinking of the company’s interest!”

people not only to ensure good quality but to learn from
them about selling. Purchasing people are experts at what
makes good salesmanship. Why? Because purchasing people
are approached all day long by salespeople and can tell stories
about the difference between effective and poor selling styles.
Marketing Department Interfaces
103
It would be good training for marketers to work in purchas-
ing for a while to learn how to deal with salespeople.
General Electric once developed a game to be played be-
tween its own purchasing and sales personnel to see who
would be more effective. The purchasing people won hands
down. GE’s management then said: “If our salespeople cannot
sell effectively to our own purchasing people, how can they sell
effectively to our customers’ purchasing people?”
• Marketers have only a few issues with the manufacturing peo-
ple. They hope that the manufacturing people produce the
products at the specified quality level so that the customers
aren’t disappointed. They also ask manufacturing to make
special short runs or add custom features, but here they en-
counter some resistance. Manufacturing costs rise when pro-
duction changes must be frequently made.
• Marketers find it hard to communicate with information tech-
nology (IT) people. The marketers talk sales, market share,
and margin, while the IT people talk COBOL, Java, Linus,
and tetrabytes. The big mistake is when marketing asks IT to
develop a database marketing system, only to regret commis-
sioning it in the first place once it is finished. Yet marketing
needs database software and supply chain software if cus-
tomers are to be served well. Clearly, marketing departments