Have you ever stacked something so wrong that when you get done, you are sure everything is going to topple over? A great example of this is having a basement storage room that receives new additions as something is discarded or no longer used. The item is placed on something else that was discarded sometime in the past. Just as you have seen in the movies, after a while the stack gets so large that it just topples over – usually on the unexpecting dolt cast just to get a cheap laugh.

Marketing Technology stacks quickly become that storage area if intentional planning is not completed for process and structure. In many cases, marketing technologies are added as needed to remain competitive and/or relevant. However, most of the technologies are added without high consideration to the rest of the technology stack and how the product will be integrated, updated, and optimized. And, just like a storage area without careful planning and effective organization, it all becomes disorganized and possibly comes crashing down.

To avoid this type of inevitable “crash”, there are four very important aspects to take into consideration.

Include the Right People from the Beginning

Too often, companies allow process, people and especially technology decisions be made unilaterally due to the nature of the subject matter at hand. Understandably, companies want to be able to make swift progress and the more constituents that are involved the longer the decision and process will take. However, not involving the main stakeholders may result in rework later in the process. In all technology decisions, the following should be involved from the beginning:

1. End User – making sure there are clear and states business objectives that the user is seeking to resolve is the most important element. If the solution solves only a part of the issue, more technology will need to be purchased in the future.
2. Technology Team – it is critical that the people that will be technically supporting the solution are in the process. This team’s input helps to determine the overall costs, return on investment, security, and most importantly that the thing will run correctly.
3. Business or Technical Architect – acting as the “quarterback”, the business or technical architect will create a long-term roadmap designed to insure the technology is future-proofed. This includes integrating into current and future technologies and insuring the technical product will not be outdated at the next release.
4. Financial Analyst or CFO – technology projects many times run over budget, requiring repetitive requests for funding from the companies’ financial team. Creating a clear understanding for the individual in charge of finances for the company will allow them to understand the value of the expense, but also will allow a level-setting of how the budget may fluctuate.

Look for Quality, not Value

As with everything in life, you get what you pay for. In most companies, the cost of the implementation of a new software will be close to or even more expensive than the first-year cost of the technology. Because most technologies within the marketing stack will be long-term strategic decisions, confirming the efficacy of the technology company and their potential roadmap will help to create long term success.

A few things to watch for when evaluating quality and not value:

1. Listen intently to how the salesperson talks about the product. If there is much discussion about it being reasonably priced, or there is a strong focus on quick ROI, these may be red flags. Also, pushing for a quick sell or time-based “deals” may also be red flags.
2. Focus on singular solution – the product needs to consider how it integrates with other products within the stack (especially CMS and CRM) and how the interchange works. Without this, you may be buying a “one trick pony” that doesn’t like to play well with others.
3. Substantial turn-over within sales team – many times companies that are selling an inferior or “cheap” product have a high turnover in sales people. If you have been called multiple times by the same company but different sales people each time, this may be a red flag.

Integration, Integration, Integration

Open API layers and common plug-ins are now expected just like having seat belts in cars. The simplicity of sharing structured and unstructured data has continued to increase at a rapid rate. Ultimately there are two different types of plans that will allow for integration levels to connect all of the systems within your marketing technology stack.

The two most common types of architecture differ on how much time you want to work on the platform and how much you want to be able to integrate quickly with new technologies. The two platforms are PaaS (platform as a service) and SaaS (software as a service).

PaaS – Platform as a Service – This type of a service platform is usually built by a leader in the SaaS space that then begins to bring in additional SaaS companies to become part of the platform. These platforms solve a ton of marketing problems and are compliant with the rest of the platform, making sure that it remains “future proof”.

That said, the PaaS approach has a defined group of softwares and many times will not allow outside technologies to be integrated. This results in these types of solutions being inflexible and very costly due to the high level of quality you are receiving from the provider (think Adobe, SalesForce, etc).

SaaS – Software as a Service – This is the more “ala carte” option of marketing technology. These solutions are more advisable to a company that has a technology team that fully understands how to integrate technologies and how to maintain relevancy of the platform from the internal team.

Much like a Droid vs. iPhone, this type of “open architecture” allows to integrate almost any software, which comes with some cautions. Also, because the client is taking much of the risk of integrating the systems, the cost of ownership tends to be much lower.

Reporting, Listening and Adjusting

After a substantial capital investment has been made, the process of relevant reporting ensues. The company must have a strong set of KPIs and business objectives with an executive dashboard to give an indication if the new technology is having success.

As important, if not more important as the reporting on KPIs, is listening to the people that are operating and working within the system on a daily basis. If it is taking three times as long to do something as it did before, this should be a red flag. Having inefficiency or a system that is not fit for purpose will only get the employees frustrated. Frustration will lead to becoming disengaged which will lead to leaving the company, or worse yet, quietly quitting.

Lastly is the process of adjusting. All plans are good plans when they are constructed. They take the best information at the time with the best options and construct the primary plan. As innovation changes, costs change, and new business objectives emerge, the original plan is no longer the best plan. Having a 3-to-5-year plan is admirable. Having a living, breathing 3-to-5-year plan that can continuously be improved upon and be modified is optimal.