Am I crazy, or does the subject of this post miss the point completely?
Wasn't the whole point of this article the fact that the writer WASN'T an engineer, but that he intimately learned the product he was marketing, and that was what people wanted?
I think the point here is that the good marketers are the people who can crossover from one part of the office to the next. An engineer with no social skills will do no better than a marketer with no technical knowledge-- you need both. This article happened to be about a marketer who crossed over, not the other way around.
My takeaway was that it's that it's easier for an engineer to pick up the necessary marketing skills to sell to other engineers, rather than a business person picking up the necessary engineering skills. (Assuming that these engineers already have the necessary social skills)
An engineer with no social skills will do no better than a marketer with no technical knowledge
Edward Bernays (creator of PR and creator of Freud (the product)) might be the best marketing engineer and he hated social events and large groups of people but he understood them and how to manipulate them.
Engineers understand systems. When you realize that the best marketing is by learning the natural way that humans think and act individually or in a group then you are a good marketer no matter, fumbling bumbling idiot in social situations but knower of human ways.
Wasn't the whole point of this article the fact that the writer WASN'T an engineer, but that he intimately learned the product he was marketing, and that was what people wanted?
I think the point here is that the good marketers are the people who can crossover from one part of the office to the next. An engineer with no social skills will do no better than a marketer with no technical knowledge-- you need both. This article happened to be about a marketer who crossed over, not the other way around.