96: Natalie Miles: Building vs. buying martech, the power of generalists and assembling a composable CDP

What’s up everyone, today we’re joined by Natalie Miles, Head of Marketing Technology at Chime.

Summary: Don't underestimate the role of generalists in martech; they're your go-to for system-level thinking and breaking down data silos. Building vs buying your tech stack? It's not black and white; successful setups usually mix both, and including engineers in the decision process is non-negotiable. Considering a CDP? Opt for a composable one to get quick value and robust data management. And if you're venturing into personalization, it's your team's culture and process that'll make or break it, not just the tools. Tune into this episode for straight-up, actionable insights that cut through the noise in the martech world.

About Natalie

• Natalie started her career as a Financial Counselor at the Consumer Credit Counseling Services of San Francisco 
• She then took on the role of Quality Assurance Specialist at Lending Club, a fintech marketplace bank where she was eventually promoted to Operations Analyst
• Natalie then moved over to Credit Karma, best known for pioneering free credit scores where she started as a Marketing Operations Analyst and was later promoted to Marketing Operations Manager
• And for the last 3 years, she’s been Head of Marketing Technology at Chime, a fintech company that offers no-fee savings accounts, where she’s built and managed a holistic Martech stack supporting all channels and functions within the Marketing org

The Intersection of Financial Empathy and Marketing Operations
When asked about her transition from financial counseling to marketing operations, particularly within FinTech, Natalie illuminates how her upbringing and career have been tightly woven with mission-driven personal finance companies. Shaped by her experiences in a working-class household and graduating amid a historic economic crisis, Natalie's focus has been on transforming legacy institutions that often operate on zero-sum models—those that profit when the customer suffers. Her goal? To align business value directly with user value.

Natalie also emphasizes the importance of having a generalist background when working in marketing technology. She points out that her diverse experiences, including her time as a financial counselor, have enriched her understanding of system-level thinking—a key asset for any marketing technologist. It wasn't just about marketing; it was about leveraging technology to make different teams more efficient, whether they were marketing or support teams.

In her journey through the marketing landscape, Natalie discusses the evolution from specializing in lifecycle marketing to adopting a more generalist approach once again. She believes that understanding the pain points in one marketing channel provides insights that are transferable across other channels. This is vital because while each channel has its own nuances, they also share common threads that are integral to driving growth or achieving specific business outcomes.

Natalie underscores the concept of the "T-shaped marketer," a term often used in marketing discussions to describe professionals who start by specializing in a specific channel but gradually broaden their scope. This broad understanding is crucial in the realm of marketing technology, where preventing data silos and powering omni-channel journeys are key.

Key Takeaway: Having a generalist background isn't just about being a jack-of-all-trades; it's about mastering system-level thinking. This kind of broad perspective is invaluable in marketing technology, where understanding how various components interact can significantly improve efficiency and effectiveness. By being well-versed in multiple areas, you're better equipped to tackle complex challenges and integrate solutions that drive measurable results.

The Power of Generalism in a Specialized Marketing World

When asked about the value of a generalist background in martech, Natalie explained that many marketing organizations structure themselves around specific channels, but doing so can have its drawbacks. Specialists may be excellent at understanding the intricacies of a particular channel like Google Search but may lack a broader understanding of how to harmonize different channels for an integrated, omni-channel experience.

Natalie pointed out an often-overlooked aspect of specialized teams: they often onboard tools designed to solve specific channel needs. While this specialization can drive short-term success, it often fails to consider the bigger picture. As marketing complexity grows and companies aim for more personalized, omni-channel experiences, the need for someone who can tie all these disparate elements together becomes increasingly important.

In the startup world, this is especially significant. Startups usually kick off with generalists who can wear multiple hats and pivot as needed. As the company matures, specialists are added to the mix. Natalie highlighted the risks of over-indexing on channel-specific experts. These experts can work in silos, and this compartmentalized approach can be a roadblock when aiming for more intricate marketing strategies that require seamless coordination between channels.

One of the most compelling points Natalie made was around marketing organizations that prioritize outcomes over channels. An outcome-oriented approach can enable the same individual to manage paid retargeting ads while also running lifecycle campaigns, for instance. This blend of responsibilities demands a broader skill set and makes the case for generalists who can adapt to multiple marketing scenarios and strategies.

Key Takeaway: Don't underestimate the power of generalists in martech. They bring the critical ability to weave together various marketing channels and tools, enabling a more integrated and effective marketing strategy. If your team is too specialized, you risk creating data and strategy silos that can hamper your broader marketing objectives.

Martech's Dilemma: Engineering Constraints and the Build vs Buy Debate

When asked about Casey Winters' article on the notion that martech is essentially for engineers, Natalie offered a nuanced perspective that extends beyond the conventional build-versus-buy debate. Casey argues that martech has evolved as a response to engineering constraints, and lifting these constraints would render third-party martech solutions redundant. Natalie, while a fan of Casey and his work, respectfully disagrees with this one-dimensional view. She highlights a reality most businesses face: the absence of unlimited engineering resources. In her experience, this constraint justifies the need for third-party solutions, especially when internal solutions often lack marketer-friendly user interfaces.

Natalie touched on the complexity of allocating engineering resources effectively, particularly in sectors like FinTech. Should a FinTech company spend its limited engineering capital on building martech products, or should it focus on actual financial products that drive consumer growth? She suggests that the more pressing question businesses should be asking isn't whether to build or buy, but where to best align their engineering resources in line with their core competencies. This consideration often leads to a blend of in-house and third-party solutions in a company's martech stack.

Narrowing the definition of martech to just third-party solutions is, in Natalie's view, a limiting approach. She emphasizes that most martech stacks will inevitably be a mix of both built and bought solutions. This mix arises because even when buying a solution, substantial engineerin...