Balancing the knowledge of cost and value

Marketers typically proclaim that procurement knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Finance and procurement typically proclaim that marketing has their head in the clouds. Managing directors often have to choose the most convincing arguments between marketing and finance when it comes time to sign off on budget approval.

With deep respect for the role of finance helping ensure companies use fact based forecasting methods, a paradox is observed when considering how seldom finance departments introduce marketing mix modeling, econometrics, neural networks or ad tracking as a tool. I am not sure why finance has not entered this domain but I would have to guess it has something to do with the grey area between marketing and finance.

In the same manner, marketing has made tremendous changes over the last 5 years; in particular, getting involved with fact based marketing measurement methods. Less and less decisions are being made by gut (which is never smarter than your head!) Though best practice is on the right track, I believe however that among the majority of business to consumer companies today, there is a lack of people who understand both the cost and value of marketing. Here enters the concept of marketing intelligence. Understanding both the cost and value should be improved and if the concept of forming a marketing intelligence department should catch on, to whom should these people report too?

Marketing, Finance or direct to the CEO?

Consider this scenario: A person with strong marketing intelligence skills who has the capability to determine return on marketing investment by scientific methods reports to a marketing director. The latest campaign results are not turning out better than the previous campaign. (Neither did the campaign before that) The marketing director must report to finance and the managing director on performance. What does the marketing director do?
We can use our imagination here – pause – reflect – hmmmm.

How would a marketing intelligence person fit into a finance department? Would they feel comfortable? Would they miss the buzz and excitement of the marketing process and become auditors/controllers? (This is not meant to sound like a bad thing but for some people I know it would be a turn off ;-) I wonder if auditors and controllers also have a deep passion for marketing and get a kick out of taking calculated, intelligent risks?

Can the concept of marketing intelligence survive reporting to a marketing director where it is obvious that at some point information about the effect and efficiency of marketing activities will not appear flattering in some given quarter?