Over the past two years, there has been a marked change in the language that print and print management companies use to describe themselves. The move toward using the term ‘integrated communications provider’ and other similar monikers has not been reflected by the actions necessary truly to embody such a change.

Traditional print operators and print management companies essentially have two choices facing them – invest and adapt to become integrated providers of marketing communications or remain print-only suppliers, but be prepared to improve working practices to deliver clients’ objectives.

For businesses taking the first option, the path ahead is clear. Over the past six months or so, a number of companies have really stepped up to the mark as clients’ demand for greater clarity about return on investment has led to the emergence of organisations that can genuinely claim to provide integrated communications solutions.

Win-win situation
The advantages for clients are enormous. With print volumes down and margins being squeezed, marketers can now take advantage of the move to integrated communications to implement targeted and personalised multichannel communications campaigns, which can have a higher impact and can be more cost-effective than traditional campaigns. From a marketer’s point of view it is a win-win situation – more targeted communications at a lower price.

However, for providers to achieve this new level of service, a much deeper change is required than a mere amendment to a company’s description. The shift to providing genuine integrated communications requires a root-and-branch repositioning of traditional print and print-management companies, to embrace new channels or partner with leading suppliers who can plug gaps in experience.

A cultural change has to be undertaken from the inside out and requires strong leadership within organisations to educate staff about changes in corporate emphasis. Only at this stage should the focus be turned to the outside world.
For example, traditional print companies wishing to make the change should invest in a comprehensive training programme for staff. There is little value in offering a range of marketing delivery techniques if account handlers’ default instinct is to think solely about print solutions. Training and leadership are required to expand these frames of reference which will lead to higher levels of support for clients.

Companies that make the change successfully now have a great opportunity to get ahead of the game, but they need to be quick to embrace the level of change required.  

It would be wrong to think that print companies that decide to remain as such will see little alteration to their business models over the coming years: these changes will affect them too.

I strongly believe that margins in print can be improved even in the face of declining volumes. Once printers have decided where to invest, whether in lithographic or digital printing technology, they need to be flexible in the way that they are prepared to make margin. Marketers are more likely to be receptive to paying a reasonable margin where their campaigns are delivering a higher return on investment. We could even see in the not-so-distant future that marketers look to link the success of a campaign to the margin that they are willing to pay, encouraging the provider to show innovation in the creation and execution.

The days of mass-print-run requirements from marketing departments are numbered, if they are not already over. Print is
an industry that is struggling to redefine its role in the face of the growth of digital delivery methods and operators making unsubstantiated claims of providing integrated solutions are destined for limited success in the short term and failure in the long term.