|
CNO -Marketing
Is Not a Dirty Word
By Steve Cohen
In the
stiff competition for professional talent and congressional dollars,
the Navy
needs to do more about its public image—and fast. Last summer, a
civilian posed
a question to then-Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Mike Mullen during
one of
his "conversations with the country."
"Admiral,
you have a room full of folks here who are supporters of the Sea
Services.
You've made a strong case for the importance of a coherent maritime
strategy.
Now, what would you like us to do?" Bill Butler asked.
Admiral
Mullen uncharacteristically hemmed and hawed and seemed surprised by
the
question. Finally, he said, "We want to hear from you. You each have
two
senators and a congressman. Be in touch with them."
Mr.
Butler, a top marketing executive, persisted. "But what should we be
asking of these officials? What, exactly, do you want from them?" The
admiral never did offer a clear answer. But he did make a telling
admission.
"We're not good at marketing. It's not what we do."
While the
admiral's candor was admirable, the comment was disturbing, especially
in light
of the Navy's dismal showing in a 2004 Gallup poll that asked two key
questions
of the public: Which is the most important branch of the military? And
which is
the most prestigious? The Navy came out next to last on both, just a
few
percentage points above the Coast Guard.
Such data
strongly suggest that the Navy must get better at marketing. After all,
the
service is not merely competing in the arena of global geopolitical
power. It
is also competing in the arena of domestic public perception. Lose in
the
latter and we won't have the resources to win in the former. During one
of
Admiral Mullen's "conversations," a naval officer on the staff of a
senior admiral admitted that Navy leadership found the Gallup results
disturbing. The question he never asked outright was whether
professional
marketing could help solve the perception problem.
Too Much
Focus on Public Affairs
The
answer, I believe, is a resounding yes—but only if the Navy masters
marketing
as a discipline. Just as naval officers master disciplines outside the
traditional purview of sea power—financial management, for example—they
need to
master marketing, too. The problem is that the Navy's focus on public
affairs—rather than marketing—is depriving it of several key tools to
get the
job done. In short, public affairs officers must be marketers, too.
The Navy
may not be a business in the classic sense, but it does share some
defining
attributes. It must satisfy customers—the American people and their
elected
leaders. It must compete for resources—funding from Congress. It must
compete
for the talent of young people considering other career choices. And it
must do
so in an efficient and forthright manner. (Indeed, compared to
business, the
Navy must meet much higher standards of transparency and
accountability.) In
short, much of what the Navy has to do to achieve its mission is
marketing-dependent.
To be
sure, the Navy's public affairs organization is aware of and
responsible for
much of this. In an hour-long conversation with the Chief of
Information
(CHINFO), Rear Admiral Frank Thorp IV, I found that I was in agreement
with and
often impressed by his insights into how to take on these challenges.
But I was
also frustrated for him: the Navy, because of its inattention to
marketing,
seems to be fighting this fight with one hand tied behind its back. And
it
doesn't have to be that way. Four serious issues need to be addressed
immediately:
Recruitment—Is
the Navy meeting its needs? Are its dollars being efficiently spent?
Retention—Are
we keeping our best officers and Sailors?
Appropriations—Is the Navy being
well-served by Congress?
The Big Stick—Does the Navy effectively project
American power, whether calling on friendly ports or sailing into
combat? |