Marketing
The Invisible Backbone: Why We Cannot Afford To Undervalue The Marketers
By Poppy Lydia Sello
How Reduced Marketing Investment |
Erodes Revenue, Market Share, Brand |
Equity, |
And |
Long-Term |
Business |
Growth |
|
|
|
In periods of economic strain, when rising costs tighten margins and every executive decision feels like a battle between survival and sustainability, organisations instinctively reach for the most visible levers of cost reduction. Departments are scrutinised one by one, expenditure is reviewed line by line, and entire functions are asked to justify not only their budgets but their existence.
Within this environment, marketing almost always becomes the first sacrifice. It is paused, trimmed, renegotiated, downsized, deprioritised, and dismissed under the comforting illusion that reducing it will not have immediate consequences.
To those who evaluate a business strictly through the lens of short-term financial performance, marketing appears nonessential. It spends money before revenue is generated, its outcomes are intangible, its impact is delayed, and its value is not always visible in spreadsheets or dashboards. It is therefore perceived as optional, discretionary, and interruptible.
Yet this perception is dangerously flawed. Marketing is not a cost centre. It is not a creative indulgence. It is not a peripheral activity that exists merely to decorate the business. Marketing is the engine that powers demand, the system that fuels growth, the mechanism that sustains visibility, and the discipline that protects trust.
When marketing investment disappears, the business does not collapse overnight. In fact, nothing seems to change at first, which is precisely what makes this decision so deceptively dangerous. Revenue continues to flow because today’ s sales are not the result of today’ s silence; they are the delayed reward of yesterday’ s communication. This is the lag effect, and it is one of the most misunderstood principles in commercial strategy. The performance of the business today reflects the marketing of the past. The performance of the business tomorrow will reflect the decisions made today.
When marketing is cut, the decline begins quietly. Visibility weakens. Awareness fades. Familiarity decreases. Competitors begin to surface more aggressively in the consumer’ s line of sight. The brand loses its habitual presence in the market, which is not merely about exposure but about staying mentally available at the exact moment a customer considers a purchase. As mental availability erodes, brand associations weaken and trust begins to deteriorate.
Eventually, the consequences arrive not as gentle disturbances but as undeniable, measurable damage. Sales decline sharply. Market share contracts. Competitors solidify their dominance. The cost of rebuilding awareness becomes exponentially higher than the cost of maintaining it. What looked like a saving becomes a huge expense; what appeared prudent becomes very costly; what felt safe becomes dangerous.
Marketing is not a cost centre. It is not a creative indulgence. It is not a peripheral activity that exists merely to decorate the business. Marketing is the engine that powers demand, the system that fuels growth, the mechanism that sustains visibility, and the discipline that protects trust.
This pattern has repeated itself across industries, markets, and continents. In Africa, where consumer trust is deeply influenced by consistent presence and visibility, brands that maintain marketing spend during downturns not only survive but accelerate. They retain mental availability, expand their share of voice, and become more familiar to consumers at a time when competitors retreat and silence themselves into irrelevance. The brands that cut spend vanish from consciousness, surrendering
66 MAL69 / 25 ISSUE