Commitments: Programs vs. Campaigns

Posted by heatherrast on October 29th, 2008

“A veteran is someone who, at one point in his or her life, wrote a blank check made payable to the United States of America, for an amount “up to and including my life.”"–author unknown*

Wow.  That’s a pretty strong statement.  But when you really think about what it must mean to commit yourself (and maybe by extension, those that love you) to your country, it’s a serious act.  I know enlisting is a generous and noble pledge, but something about putting it in these stark terms really sums up commitment, in my opinion (BTW, armed forces men and women ROCK! TY!).

While clearly a less virtuous calling, this idea of “commitment” made me think about marketing strategies, and how a marketer bears a responsibility to develop plans that include activities at both a  program level and a campaign level.

I don’t believe the two terms [program and campaign] should be used interchangeably.  Without referencing Dictionary.com or Wikipedia, I’ll submit that campaign(s) is to a program as class tracks are to a post secondary degree (those that read this blog with any frequency know I have a penchant for metaphors).

Campaigns are insular, linear, and have a defined start/end date with (hopefully!) a specific target (goal/metric) objective.  They’re about getting through the class, scoring 3 credits.  Several like-themed campaigns may run in parallel, as part of a multivariate test to validate copy, design, distinguish message reception among audiences, etc.  Campaigns are but one contributing part of a whole.  The cumulative learnings of campaigns will feed into the development and execution of ensuing campaigns (for the end goal of supporting the program).  A campaign is like “Introduction to Public Relations” (which of course suggests an intermediate course offering exists).

By contrast, programs are “the big picture,” the framework within which all campaigns run.  A program implies a deeper commitment level, in terms of resources, finances, organization, and maintenance.  When a company launches a program, it pledges to endure and navigate all sentiment, positive and negative.  It can become part of the company culture. Programs can become part of the brand attributes. And a program reflects a two-way interchange between the governing body and its audiences.  If a program is abandoned or allowed to flounder, it can be public and painful.  A program is like a degree in Mass Communications (lots of tributaries/classes feeding into it).

Campaigns may be cyclical, programs are enduring.

What’s my point? Well, primarily that after determining goals or business objectives, a well-developed, championed, supported program (read: big commitment) may very well be one vehicle for achieving and sustaining community success.  And it may be the smaller, shorter, tactical, and topical campaigns that help propel the programs to the forefront.

Like what you read? Why don’t you join the two folks who have subscribed via RSS and become part of an *exclusive* club?

* discovered on Debra Drummond ’s blog, lower right hand corner.

Tags:

One Response to “Commitments: Programs vs. Campaigns”

  1. heatherrast
    Twitter: heatherrast

    Going to comment on my own post here and suggest that readers check out David Armano’s post (and stunning yet simple visual), found here: http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2008/10/click-for-large.html.

    I think his post relates to the point I wanted to make about programs, the implication being that brands must wholly commit to programs with intentions of inviting participants, permitting free dialogue, overseeing (but not interfering) its viral legs, and openly sharing news and content that reflects both the positive and the not-so-positive about the brand. Truly, an impostor can be felt a social community mile away…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv Enabled