The wide scope of Martech can be separated in many sub sets – but you have to keep it together as well.
I recently read a great article from Scott Brinker at Chief Martech (check it out here) about the difficulties in trying to separate Advertising Technology and Marketing Technology!
My personal view is that Adtech vs Martech is certainly a good example of two terms that can be separated on a detailed/granular level, but are interlinked and overlapping on a higher level (in my world it makes good sense to regard adtech as a sub-set of martech).
While the habit of separating terms and fields of martech often makes sense from an execution stand point (you need different tools and platforms to execute the granular details in various channels), it leads to challenges well – as different team members are using different martech solutions for their various roles in the Enterprise marketing organization. The problem that I see with this is that there is often no common tool on a higher strategic level, to align whatever actions are being managed with all the execution tools. Hence the overall planning and follow up is suffering!
We have noticed this as a growing problem that sometimes is actually bigger within the savviest marketing organizations that are using the most martech! Some teams have become technical experts in executing individual activities in separate channels, but are still struggling to maintain an accurate overview and control of the overall marketing plan and how its’ various parts align and correlate – strategically as well as financially.
I would argue that all your martech operations and activities (whether advertising or owned etc) should have a shared top-level entity for the strategic and financial planning, and that the results should also be brought up to this top level for overall Plan performance analytics. Only then can you really gain the perspective required for overall cross-channel ROI insights on plan level (which is something completely different from channel specific attribution)!