The direct mail (DM) sector has taken a battering over the past few years. Public perception is at an all-time low, the recession has left a trail of destruction across the sector, and the rise of digital alternatives has provided marketers with a range of cheaper alternatives to the traditional mailshot. The threat is significant and the perception of mail as an environmentally harmful medium is so ingrained that despite the best efforts of organisations like the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) and Two Sides, most people believe that printing anything is a bad thing.
However, all is not lost. Next week sees the official launch of the Strategic Mailing Partnership (SMP), a new initiative from Royal Mail that has the singular goal of saving the DM industry. PrintWeek caught up with industry stalwart and former Postwatch national vice-chair Judith Donovan CBE, who has been appointed as the independent chair to the organisation.

What is the SMP and what are its goals?
A new initiative for mailing houses, sponsored by Royal Mail (RM), to bring them and RM closer together with the overall objective of ‘better mail'. That means better mail presentation, better mail performance and better mail perception, which, if you think about it, is everything from getting envelopes the right way in the tray through to stopping Defra telling the entire world that DM is single-handedly destroying the rainforests. It's quite a broad agenda, because there's no point in just getting the mailing houses and RM to understand the processes and the systems better if we don't look at it in the bigger context - that we have a medium that's under threat and that's not performing very well.

What is the greatest challenge in promoting better mail?
Better perception will be the most challenging without a doubt because that is not within the gift of anybody in the SMP. Neither RM nor the mailing houses can directly change the perception of mail but what we can do is start to build alliances to make sure our messages get out to key people. To that end, the SMP has already met with the shadow minister, the Shareholder Executive, BIS and Defra. So we've already started those conversations to say, "mail is part of the fabric of this country, it does a lot of good – 90% of charities would go bust without mail - so let's separate truth from rumour".

What is the current perception of the DM industry?
I've been in this industry for 40 years and I think we've reached the point where we're used to being cowed. We're used to being the bad guys, we're used to being the people that put out ‘that junk' and we're used to being told we're destroying the Amazon. I think the industry has almost got to the point where it's been beaten into submission, so the true story and the positive stuff hasn't been put out. We should be walking tall - we're a key part of the economy, we're a major employer and, as I say, most charities would go bust without DM, to give one example. Ironically, here we are in a general election and the first people to have a fit would be the MPs if they couldn't do mailshots. We've got to redress the balance.

What is currently the biggest problem with DM?
Bloody awful DM. My generation of people, who pioneered DM in this country, knew that it was a very specialist craft and that there were a lot of rules and a lot of tricks and a lot of techniques and, when you put them all together, you had stonking performance. I look at the stuff that comes through my letter box at home and I weep, because all that has been lost and we're back to the bad old days of the 1970s when people thought direct mail was putting a brochure in an envelope. It's tragic. Part of the mission of SMP is to raise the standard of how DM is put together. In order to do that, we need to upskill the mailing houses because they themselves are not DM experts in a strategic sense, so we will be looking at creating some toolkits and some sort of training programme that they can use.

How will a closer relationship with RM benefit the DM sector?
Historically on things like product specifications, technical developments and so on, RM tended to do it, sign it off, announce it. I'm old enough to remember when Mailsort was introduced and we were given something like four weeks as an industry to absorb Mailsort into our operating procedures - it was a typical state monopoly attitude to life. What we have now is a situation where some of the key product and technical people from RM sit on the SMP board and they're using the SMP as an early test bed for any proposed changes. That's a massive shift.

What is the current make-up of the SMP board?
We picked the board very carefully for geographical spread, size of business and functionality. We knew that we had to get the full spectrum from the kick off and the board has the full spectrum. We hope to operate on a cluster strategy where we'd create three or four key groups that would become the constituencies for elections to the board. My instinct is that they would probably be split by functionality, but it could equally go by size, or even by geography. From that, a maximum of four clusters will be created, each of which will have three board members.

How much influence does the SMP have with government?
We haven't got a massive amount yet – but we have identified the people in Whitehall whom we need to persuade to become ambassadors for the medium. If we can persuade them, then they are correctly placed, like fifth columnists, to spread the word. We accept that it's a very big, long-term job, but it's not only our job – it's the whole industry's job. We are finding it's quite easy to get appointments. We're being well listened to and, when you get into Whitehall and Westminster, they quite like meeting real people who have real businesses. I've taken members with me who can say "I own this mailing house in Northampton" or "I do this stuff in Portsmouth" and they're very often people whom those who work in Whitehall don't get to meet - PrintWeek readers, proper business people, and I think that's making a difference, because there's a credibility tick in the box there, which wouldn't be there if you sent in RM people.

Why should a small DM firm join – what are the benefits?
You're going to find out earlier and with more clarity any RM changes that will affect technical specifications for products and, if you've just encountered something that has caused a problem, you'll have the chance to put any questions, complaints, or concerns to the right person in RM who can influence it. This is very much a two-way process. You're also going to have access to toolkits and training on how to make better direct mail. The benefits are probably bigger for a small firm than for a PLC.

Does DM really need another body on top of the DMA?
The DMA and the SMP have exactly the same long-term objectives and the DMA has welcomed the arrival of the SMP – quite a lot of the SMP's shadow board are on the DMA's mailing house council. I think the difference is that the DMA is representing all direct-response mail – it's a very broad church and really is about direct marketing and the rights of consumers to have direct relationships with brands. They've got a much, much broader canvas to paint. The beauty of the SMP is that we are if you like a one-issue political party, and we're a very selfish one-issue political party because, if DM vanishes, the only people who will go bust are the mailing houses.

Should the SMP include downstream access providers (DSAs)?
I don't think it makes a great deal of difference. Firstly, this is a RM initiative, they've put significant budget and management resource behind it, but secondly there are no end-to-end providers. All the DSA boys are shoving it back into RM for the final mile. In terms of the performance of the medium, the DSA companies have not particularly seen it as their job to promote better mail, because their business imperatives are coming from a different place. Obviously it would be inappropriate because RM are paying, but actually we see it as irrelevant, because it's about mail presentation and mail delivery. I'm not even sure that they would be interested – SMP members do not report particularly proactive relationships with DSA companies. I think DSA companies see themselves very much as pipeline operators and we've got a much broader strategic agenda than pipeline.

How big is the threat to the mailing industry?
It's worrying and it's no one single factor. The green agenda is part of it, fraud and identity threat is an increasing consumer concern and the proliferation of door-to-door leafleting is adding to the poor perception. Meanwhile, the client has a lot more channel choice and isn't getting the response from DM they used to get because they're not being given outstanding DM. It's like a perfect storm all coming together at once. I don't think it's too late but I would hate DM to go back to being a niche product and I think that's possibly the risk. That it could end up being a very expensive, highly targeted, niche product that works incredibly well. If that happens then it would have a massive effect on UK PLC because if it doesn't stay as a volume player, the implications for the Universal Service Obligation (USO) are that it dismantles RM's entire 350 year corporate model that links this country together – DM is a key part of why the USO is still sustainable.

CV Judith Donovan CBE

• Founded a marketing agency, Judith Donovan Associated, in 1982, which grew to over 50 staff, and a turnover of £12.5m, before selling in 2000
• Board director of HSE, BIG Lottery Fund and British Wool Marketing Board
• Former vice chair of Postwatch, president of Bradford Chamber of Commerce, chair of the Yorkshire Tourist Board, chair of Bradford TEC, a Millennium Commissioner and a trustee of Northern Ballet Theatre