> Marketing doesn't create value; it distributes and sells it.
But that value doesn't exist until marketing "unlocks" it! The example discussed is marketing finding a new vertical which then expands the profitability of a product line without any additional work. A portion of the value didn't exist until marketing sold it to a new market. I don't consider that conflation of ideas, more of highlighting the nuance that quantifiable portions of value cannot be ascribed to individual efforts.
The fact that value is subjective and immeasurable doesn't insult anyone who tries to make good things. I try to make good things too, the value I get from them is the sense of accomplishment that I've done a good job. But whether my "good job" translates into a $1bn unicorn is up to luck, not simply my effort.
I think your disagreement with Graham is over a definition of words. You seem to be saying that creation of value is the indivisible sum of efforts to (a) decide what to build, (b) build it, and (c) sell it. He assumes a and b can be isolated out.
In any case though, take any highly successful company. Imagine if all the marketing people and product/engineering/design people were suddenly segregated, and forced to work without the other. Who's more worried?
I'm not at all saying marketing people are useless, which seems to be the idea you take issue with. They provide value. But (I'm sorry) less than the designers and engineers, and measurably so, from successive thought experiments like the above. That's why they're paid less.
"The fact that value is subjective and immeasurable doesn't insult anyone who tries to make good things. I try to make good things too, the value I get from them is the sense of accomplishment that I've done a good job."
But by your argument, I can steal your sense of accomplishment by saying, who knows how much of your success was due to you? How much was due to the marketing team? 10%? 50%? 80%?
"But whether my "good job" translates into a $1bn unicorn is up to luck, not simply my effort."
On this topic I mostly defer to Hamming's point in You and Your Research. I'd say there's luck involved, not that it's up to luck. While it's true not everyone who can become Bill Gates does, some people outright can't become Bill Gates, while others can. The point is, this doesn't show that value is subjective.
> In any case though, take any highly successful company. Imagine if all the marketing people and product/engineering/design people were suddenly segregated, and forced to work without the other. Who's more worried?
I tend to avoid engaging in the eternal engineer vs. sales/marketing debate (nothing ever comes of it), but that sounds like a pretty disingenuous argument. Whether you remove (a) and (b) or (c) from the equation, you're still missing an essential part of the business. Engineers with 0 sales channels make 0 revenue. Marketers/Salespeople with no product make 0 revenue. Who should be more worried?
If you're saying "Well, engineers could always try selling stuff themselves, while marketers couldn't code" you're adding, I believe, unwarranted assumptions. The reason people are paid more or less has more to do with supply/demand. Also note that salespeople at Oracle often make more money than their engineers.
Of course "marketers" could code (it's not that hard) and of course coders could sell (lose the self defeating "introvert" bullshit). If one or two people do everything that's required to "provide value", what do you have? A startup.
But that value doesn't exist until marketing "unlocks" it! The example discussed is marketing finding a new vertical which then expands the profitability of a product line without any additional work. A portion of the value didn't exist until marketing sold it to a new market. I don't consider that conflation of ideas, more of highlighting the nuance that quantifiable portions of value cannot be ascribed to individual efforts.
The fact that value is subjective and immeasurable doesn't insult anyone who tries to make good things. I try to make good things too, the value I get from them is the sense of accomplishment that I've done a good job. But whether my "good job" translates into a $1bn unicorn is up to luck, not simply my effort.