What is IT's role in owning budget for marketing/CX technologies in organization's today?

10.8k viewscircle icon1 Upvotecircle icon11 Comments
Sort by:
CIO10 months ago

We currently function as a capability to our business partners or another capability partner.  I believe partnership is important, where IT can bring platforms alternatives, resources, security, identity, etc expertise in providing an outcome for marketing as an owner.  Ultimately, they own the spend in this example.

Lightbulb on1
10 months ago

IT ownership becomes more relevant when technology crosses functions and departments. Integration often exceeds what marketers can oversee, necessitating IT's involvement. IT can act as the ears on the ground for cross-functional tools, ensuring smooth integration and operation. This alignment is crucial for broader organizational success.

CIO in Consumer Goods10 months ago

Forget 'ownership'. IT and Marketing need to be partners. IT brings security, infrastructure, and integration expertise. Marketing brings customer understanding and campaign goals. Together, they drive an impactful CX.

Lightbulb on2
10 months ago

I strongly believe that marketing should own the budget for marketing tools. This allows for better ROI tracking and accountability. However, IT should be a partner in this process, supporting the implementation and integration. The only exception is if the tool is used beyond marketing. In those cases, a shared budget might be more appropriate.

Lightbulb on2
CMO, CSO10 months ago

Co-ownership or shared responsibility between IT and marketing is beneficial. Marketing should budget for the tools they need, while IT handles implementation and management costs. This approach builds relationships and cohesiveness towards common goals. It ensures that neither group bears the full burden and promotes collaboration. Shared responsibility has worked well in my experience.

Lightbulb on1

Content you might like

Executive Support10%

Projects vs. Operations68%

Building a culture of Security15%

Team Completeness5%

View Results

Insufficient integrations34%

Valuable features are complex to use37%

Rigid and non-customizable/configurable48%

Support and service are hard to access / benefit from34%

Expensive compared to alternatives20%

Other (please comment)7%

View Results