What skills are now required of marketers? Direction demanded in the era of "on-off integration," as seen by a creative producer.

Today, the world of marketing has entered an era of "on-off integration," where companies approach customers through every channel, both online and offline. Within this landscape, the roles expected of marketers may also be changing.

This time, we interview Masahiro Miyagawa of Dentsu Digital Inc., who also appeared in "Is the Customer Journey Really Outdated? Key Marketing Points Required in the 'On-Off Integration' Era." Mr. Miyagawa, who handles mass advertising like TV commercials, digital, and offline media like events, truly excels as an "on-off integrated producer." We asked him about the skills and mindset required of marketers in today's era.

What Makes a Good Marketer from a Creative Producer's Perspective?

Q. From your perspective managing various creative teams, what kind of person do you consider a "good marketer"?

Miyakawa: First and foremost, it goes without saying, someone who can solidly outline basic strategies and customer journeys based on data. Furthermore, I believe the fundamental ability of a "good marketer" is the power to meticulously map out the target audience's psychological journey. However, when defining the target audience, it's crucial not to get overly fixated on superficial information like age or family structure. For instance, income is certainly a major characteristic for understanding the target, and "high-income, high-class individuals" is a useful condition for narrowing down the target. But relying solely on such broad categorizations often doesn't work well. What's more important is capturing aspects like "they exhibit these behavioral traits" or "they value these specific values and habits." Having that kind of information makes it much easier for creative staff to develop concepts, as they can start from the "target insights."

Q. I see. In your case, Mr. Miyagawa, when creating creative work, you're often in the position of receiving briefings from clients or from marketers and planners on the same team. What do you consider a "good briefing"?

Miyagawa: This is purely my personal opinion, but I believe that if you can get data, the more the better. There was a marketer I worked with in the past, let's call him Mr. A. He was like a "survey demon" – he excelled at conducting both quantitative and qualitative research on the target service thoroughly and quickly. At the time, we were working on a "reservation app" project. Mr. A conducted massive surveys, materialized numerous personas, and then swiftly sorted out who was and wasn't the target audience. As a result, the creative team could eliminate waste in proposal development. Furthermore, advancing proposals based on such information ultimately fosters a sense of unity with the client, making it easier to become one team.

Of course, sometimes data isn't readily available. Clients might not have the right data, or even if they do, they might not share it with us. Or perhaps we can't gather enough through our own research. Time for research is limited, and it's probably more common to struggle to get the data we need. But even in those situations, there are things we can do, even if the granularity is lower. For instance, conducting brief interviews with people close to the target profile, or gathering user voices through social listening techniques. The methods and precision for gathering data can be flexible, yet they still provide solid "clues." When marketers or planners provide such an orientation, the precision of the proposals coming from the creative team also improves.

Precisely because we live in an era where results are easily visible, the ability to collect and utilize data becomes crucial.

Q. Mr. Miyagawa, you seem to place significant emphasis on data. Is this a common trend among creative staff these days? My impression from a little while ago was that many creative staff, if anything, didn't want to be too constrained by data. To put it bluntly, quite a few people would say things like, "People who respond to surveys are just special cases," and valued their own intuition more.

Miyagawa: That's true, we did have staff like that not too long ago (laughs). But nowadays, data provides valuable hints for planning. More importantly, as creatives, we now see the immediate data results showing the impact of our work in the world – the success or failure of a campaign becomes clear right away. That's a huge difference. In the past, when we only had offline campaigns like TV commercials, it wasn't possible to get such direct data on how the creative was received. But now, especially with "integrated online-offline" campaigns, even TV commercials get evaluated immediately—by site traffic the next day, conversion rates, and so on. If it doesn't work, it gets labeled a "failure" right then and there. Creative staff are pushed into this environment, so I think their motivation to "look closely at the data precisely because we don't want to miss the mark" is growing stronger.

Of course, clients themselves are also deepening their knowledge of digital marketing, making the "evaluate by data" approach the norm. Cases where it's simply "let's try it because it seems interesting" have significantly decreased. In the past, approaches like deliberately questioning or ignoring data and briefs under the guise of needing a "creative leap" were sometimes accepted. But now that behavioral data is so readily available, there's little room for leaps with weak justification. More importantly, such leaps are now likely to be judged as questionable – even if they are correct.

Q. In the advertising and sales promotion field, there used to be a world where you had "legendary advertising directors" or "managers who could truly engage with creative work," making decisions based on experience-driven intuition. Is that approach no longer viable?

Miyagawa: No, I certainly don't mean to dismiss that world.

However, today, anyone can share the same results and numbers by looking at analytics tool dashboards, regardless of experience. Of course, seeing the same numbers doesn't mean everyone will reach the same conclusion. Still, compared to the past, everyone can now discuss and evaluate on the same playing field. Looking at it positively, this means the likelihood of missing the mark has decreased, and we now have access to far more material to support that.

On that level playing field, I feel what's becoming necessary is the realm of the "seasoned master" or the kind of direction only someone with exceptional taste can provide.

Q. Given that, it seems the role of the "marketer" is becoming more important than ever before.

Miyagawa: Exactly. It comes down to how much data and information marketers can gather as a foundation. Of course, data isn't just quantitative information. It includes qualitative insights too – data that helps grasp target audience insights. Precisely because the results of executed strategies become immediately apparent, having as much material as possible to boost success rates is essential. And then, what do you extract from that? How can we narrow down the winning points? Marketers who can engage in such discussions earn respect from both creative staff and clients. Ultimately, they can reduce waste, which aligns well with the current trends.

The shift towards integrated online-offline promotions becoming the norm isn't just about needing the ability to plan campaigns that encompass digital channels. A crucial point is also the demand to "consistently deliver effective plans in an environment where results are judged instantly." That's precisely why the ability to gather as much information and data as possible to avoid missteps seems essential for marketers and planners. Amidst diversifying methods, "information gathering capability" may once again be becoming a vital factor.