Only in politics does negative marketing work. Why?

I've been following the Republican debates and campaigns with a great deal of interest.  I've found them to be enlightening, educational and increasingly childish.  Slings and arrows are everywhere! However, don't mistake my criticism as being exclusive to the Republican candidates.  Similar sophomoric tactics are used with just as much consistency and malice on the democrat side as well.

As an American, I feel an obligation to vote during any election, whether it be for a local school board member or the President of the United States.  While I'm saddened that so many Americans seem to view voting as a waste of time, I must admit that politics is a dirty game, and it simply disgusts many potential voters.

Only in politics can one candidate change facts, twist words, and launch personal attacks on opposition candidates and their families, resulting in more votes for him/herself.  The twisted logic goes like this:  "If I succeed at making my opponent look worse then he can make me look, then I win."  A growing number of politicians are taking a "lesser of two evils" approach to campaigning.  I find it mind boggling!

Imagine if we applied similar marketing principles to our own products or services. 

How many of our businesses would succeed if we launched marketing campaigns actively criticizing our competition and misleading consumers about competitor pricing, product quality, employees and customer service, rather than simply speaking to the value, innovation and competitive advantages of our own brands?

Certainly there are some companies that choose to use questionable marketing tactics, but by and large the vast majority of businesses maintain a measurable level of civility, unlike in politics.

So why don't the rules applied to the marketing of products and services also apply to election campaigns?  The answer is simple:  Because the people who write those rules are the same ones practicing ethically dubious political campaigns!

It's a disturbing trend that is only getting worse.  Just once I'd like to see a campaign that is focused solely on the issues, not on attacking a candidate's family, mistakes made in the distant past (something we're all guilty of), or a barrage of unrelenting ad hominems.  What ever happened to moral integrity, strong character and personal accountability?  In politics none of these core values seem to be the least bit important.  While some people will criticize big business practices, big business can't hold a candle to politics when it comes to ethics, or lack thereof. 

A suggestion to all politicians:  Learn from good marketers, not bad ones.  Please...

*The opinions shared on this blog are solely those of its author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of Goodwill of Greater Washington, its affiliates or supporters.

Marketing Trends for 2012

I love the team at eConsultancy who were once again kind enough to share their five key marketing trends for 2012.  I always enjoy reading them, and have added a few of my own at the bottom of their predictions. 

Let me know what you think will be the key marketing trends in the New Year and whether you agree with those listed.

1. Advertising-as-a-service
Traditional advertising must evolve. Recent research from Havas Media revealed that consumers are no longer enamored with the advertising they see, and feel that “just one in five brands has a notable positive impact on their quality of life.” The truth is, consumers are no longer interested in traditional advertising being‘pushed’ at them and are increasingly switching-on to communication channels that provide a service.

2. Connected devices
One of the most significant developments for 2012 is without a doubt the emergence of connected TVs and even more significantly, how consumers will interact via second screens. According to Nielsen's 2011 mobile connected devices report, 70% of tablet users and 68% of smartphone users use their device while watching TV, usually in a social sense and more often than not this social activity isn’t tied to the programme they’re watching. This is the untapped marketplace that savvy advertisers and brands in 2012 should create compelling content for.

3. Mobile
Over the past year, mobile devices have led both technological and marketing innovation. Google states that 79% of smartphone owners use their mobiles to aid in shopping and 74% make a purchase as a result. Smartphones have revolutionised how we interact with content on-the-go and in 2012 the mobile device will continue to play a significant role.

4. Multichannel Engagement
We’re now entering an era where almost any device or surface can have an internet connection, and as such, video can be displayed almost anywhere. So prevalent has video become as the preeminent communication tool of our age that Cisco's Visual Networking Index shows that by 2015, 1m minutes of video will cross the internet every second. Already brands are moving toward this kind of engagement, this is only just the beginning for multichannel marketing in 2012.

5. The Amazon Effect
While it’s not a trend per se, I wanted to highlight the growth of the dominant media force that is Amazon. Its platform is now utilised by many brands to boost their own e-commerce and the upcoming Kindle Fire is being heralded as the first serious threat to Apple’s all-conquering iPad. Effectively communicating with ‘switched-on’ consumers isn’t a stretch for Amazon and it’s already proven its agile organisational structure works. Amazon constantly evolves its business model to adapt to the marketplace and brands that look beyond their original heritage will offer customers unique and bespoke services.

I believe all five of the trends above are on the mark.  However, I'd like to add three more 2012 marketing trends of my own:

1.  QR Code-mania
As if we didn't seen this coming!  For the past several years, the primary question for marketers has been, "How to harness the power of social media".  In 2012, that will change to, "How to harness the power of QR codes"; and it's already begun.  A QR code is a low cost, low resource marketing channel that can effectively utilize existing content.  The biggest challenge for marketers will be identifying content that will entice smart phone users enough to scan the retailer's QR codes while keeping the consumer engaged.  Manufacturers are already developing and producing smartphones with default QR code scanners which will make the codes a much hotter information gathering tool in 2012.

2.  The return of cash driven CSR
This is great news for charitable agencies.  As the first 2012 marketing trend identified above by eConsultancy indicates, consumers are increasingly looking for some community benefit from their purchasing options.  However, this will extend beyond the direct to consumer purchase.  It will have a much greater impact on CSR initiatives.  For the past several years, businesses have been adopting a "spend less, volunteer more" CSR philosophy.  Unfortunately, those efforts haven't really produced the type of community goodwill that most businesses had anticipated internally or externally.  Why?  Because volunteer days don't generate sustainable results, everyone is doing it, and far too few charities can manage a deluge of 100 volunteers one day only to see them disappear the next.  A "day of service" sounds good, but simply isn't practical anymore.  What tends to have a greater and more sustainable impact on social causes is the infusion of cash, as a growing number of charitable agencies are forced to shut their doors resulting from the global economic crisis.  Financial contributions can produce good PR and measurable results.  Therefore, while investments may not be as strong as they were around the turn of the century, you'll begin to see an increasing number of businesses going back to a more cash focused CSR strategy.  However, their spending will likely target programs and services that can generate long term, self sustaining and measurable impact.

3. Greater government involvement in advertising and media
Sorry folks, this is the inevitable result of bigger government.  Over the past decade we've seen stronger regulations on advertising in schools, stadiums, digital; and on ads for tobacco and those targeting children, among others.  Now there are calls for government arbitration in private, marketplace negotiations between cable service providers and local TV broadcasters on retransmission consent.  Whether you agree with these regulations or not, they aren't going away and in all likelihood will only increase in 2012 and beyond.

Let me know what you think of the trends identified above and if you have any to add to the list.

Here's to a terrific 2012!!

*The opinions shared on this blog are solely those of its author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of Goodwill of Greater Washington, its affiliates or supporters.

The Customer Experience Often Begins & Ends Online

Your prices are well researched and fair.  Your product presentation, functionality and distribution strategies are flawless.  You have very talented managers and associates who have been well trained in customer service, and your marketing team believes in the "customer is always right" philosophy.  So now you feel you've addressed all of your customer experience issues and will surely impress, convert and retain customers, right?

Hmmm...not so fast.  In today's digital world far more consumers have their first interaction with a product, service or business online.  They're visiting your website, Facebook page, mobile app, email newsletter or other digital platform before they ever step foot in your store or pick up the phone to call you.  And if they have a bad experience online, it's probably the last interaction they ever have with you. 

According to Neilson, 70% of online social network users shop online.  Digby.com says, "67% of consumers will use their smartphones to find store locations, 59% to compare prices, 51% to obtain product information, 46% to check product availability, 45% to shop online, 41% to find and use coupons, and 40% to scan bar codes".  And the figures are only growing.

Do you make it easy for customers to reach someone who can help them?  Remember, online shoppers aren't confined by brick and mortar hours of operation.  While this might seem elementary to most B2C retailers these days, many are still focused primarily on their websites, but haven't spent much time managing their social media and/or digital channels.  Additionally, more B2B consumers are using social media to research products and services as well. 

According to a recent study by Accenture, "only 8% of B2B companies would describe their social media usage as extensive. This is in contrast to the 65% of respondents who indicated that social media is extremely or very important."

Far too often, businesses still judge social media success purely by the direct and immediate impact it has on the bottom line, rather than looking at it as a customer service tool that helps ensure brand loyalty.  It is a point of direct engagement with a consumer or customer and provides a powerful and unique opportunity to show them that you appreciate and value their input and feedback.  Those who aren't viewing social media as a large part of the customer experience are still missing the boat.  But they won't be for long, because if present trends continue, they'll either be forced to adopt or forced to close shop.

So, how is your online customer experience?

Living Social Looking to Change its Business Model

In a recent interview with the Washington Business Journal, LivingSocial CEO  Tim O’Shaughnessy said, “We don’t view ourselves as a daily deals business, we view ourselves as a local commerce business”.  According to the author, O'Shaughnessy's comment hints at a possible shift in the LivingSocial business model.

O'Shaughnessy envisions a future where LivingSocial becomes an online seller of goods and services beyond just its daily deals.

The story points out that Amazon (a LivingSocial investor) is seeing tremendous growth outside of its books, movie and music sales.  Could Living Social soon become a competitor in this space...or a partner?

With free and geo-targeted "special offer" sites like Foursquare starting to gain some momentum as a self managed retail resource, and QR codes providing greater reach for retailers hoping to promote discounts at little to no cost, perhaps O'Shaughnessy is weighing a shift in LivingSocial's business model more as a mitigation strategy than a growth opportunity. 

There are a growing number of LivingSocial competitors popping up every day with new and unique competitive advantages that chip away at the huge market share that LivingSocial and Groupon now control.  Take recently launched Recoup for example.  Recoup has a daily deal model similar to LivingSocial's but with a more philanthropic mission.  Every purchase made on Recoup benefits a charitable agency of the consumer's choice.  The businesses that are selling on Recoup can also contribute a portion of each sale to a charitable cause.  Additionally, Recoup doesn't charge businesses up front unlike LivingSocial and Groupon.  In today's very socially conscious consumer culture and skeptical business culture, Recoup may be well positioned to take a measurable bite out of its high priced competitors.

O'Shaughnessy's comments are interesting.  What will be even more interesting is what is to follow.

Why you should spend more time at the bar when attending your next conference...

The best learning at a professional development conference is often not done in the classroom; it's done on the bus and at the bar.  And I say that with all sincerity!

I recently returned from a national marketing conference where I was asked to sit on a mobile marketing panel.  It was an excellent three days.  I learned as much from the people in my session as I hope they learned from me.

There were several very good workshops where I gleaned some useful information that will help me as I continue to try to improve my organization's marketing strategies and enhance my personal knowledge.

However, as I was reflecting on the event during the plane ride home, and was looking at the action steps I considered the highest priorities, I discovered that all of them except one came from a conversation I had with someone...outside the classroom.  One came during a conversation at the bar, one came from a conversation on a bus ride to a site visit, one came over a cup of coffee in between sessions, and one came from someone who was sitting in my session trying to learn from ME!

I'm not dismissing the value of the information I gathered at the workshops and panel discussions.  There was some great idea sharing and thought provoking content.  However, the broader professional development sessions generally tend to center more on philosophical or conceptual ideas.  Often times programs consist of case studies with presenters explaining "what and why", but not "how".  And sometimes sessions will focus on data sharing, that while interesting, isn't adequately translated into an action plan.

But the casual conversations with peers, outside a formal setting, often tend to generate organic, actionable ideas that result from shared challenges.  Sometimes the person I spoke with already had a solution that I thought would work for us.  Other times, our impromptu brainstorming resulted in a strategy that we both thought might work well for us independently or by leveraging our combined assets.

Why?  Because typically these conversations are just that...conversations!  Both parties are listening, speaking and debating.  In a professional workshop, everyone in the room but the presenter/s is listening, while only one person is speaking.  It's not a two way dialogue. Yes, there is often time for Q & A at the end of a session, but sharing that opportunity with 20 or 30 other people doesn't really allow for a meaningful discourse. 

Here is an idea that conference planners may wish to adopt in the future:  Allow for one on one time with every presenter.  Schedule it almost like a speed networking session but for longer periods of time (perhaps 15 minutes).  Attendees can register for individual consultations during the conference.  While it may seem unreasonable to expect a speaker to spend an entire day in one on one sessions with guests, some may actually appreciate it, as they are often business executives using these speaking opportunities for prospecting anyway.  For those that don't wish to participate, make it optional.  Having spoken at many conferences, my guess is that most presenters will be willing to give up a couple of hours.  The majority of attendees may not take advantage of the opportunity, but for those who do, it will be a tremendous benefit.

Next time you attend a conference, don't judge the overall value based solely on what you learn sitting in meeting rooms.  Judge it based on what you learn both inside AND outside the meeting rooms.  I think you'll find the conference to be more beneficial than expected.

Nonprofits Need to Start Playing More in the Corporate Sandbox

Because I transitioned into the nonprofit sector from the corporate sector, perhaps I view this subject through a different lens than many of my peers; but I still see one major problem with nonprofit marketers:  They tend to spend too much time associating with other nonprofits.

For the record, I'm not suggesting that they stop doing so.  As a matter of fact, I recently attended the AMA/AMAF Nonprofit Marketing Conference in Washington, DC which provided a great opportunity for nonprofit marketers to share best practices and learn from both peers and experts.  They were even kind enough to present me with a tremendous honor as the 2011 National Nonprofit Marketer of the Year!  It was a wonderful experience and I'm quite certain I'll be back.

So, I'm not recommending that nonprofit marketers stop associating with other nonprofit marketers.  However, I am recommending that they start spending more time associating with corporate marketers and business leaders. 

How many nonprofit marketers have attended regional business lunches or events and been seated at the "nonprofit table"?  When that happens, I feel like I'm being placed at the kiddie table at Thanksgiving dinner.  I've begun specifically requesting that I not be placed at the nonprofit table.  While I find great value in my nonprofit relationships, I'm not going to secure funding for my organization from other nonprofits, unless they are foundations whose goals happen to align with our mission.  The greater value to me as a nonprofit marketer is in developing relationships with the corporate sector; positioning my organization as an impactful regional business and community leader, not just a nonprofit leader.  I want to leverage the national power of the Goodwill brand to strengthen my organization's regional influence.

Strategic partnerships that will enhance our brand, while driving revenue and reputation will more frequently result from alignment with corporate partners who have deep pockets and tremendous reach.  Not with other community based organizations that have databases composed almost exclusively of individuals passionate about any cause other than our own.

Strong nonprofit marketers should be joining groups like the AMA, chambers of commerce, boards of trade and other regional business associations, giving them greater opportunities to network with decision-makers who can have a direct impact on their mission, reputation and revenue.  But taking on leadership roles is critical!  There is little value in joining for the sake of joining. You MUST get involved.

Working side by side with corporate leaders and proving your capable of achieving results will increase the likelihood of getting corporations to listen and respond positively to your "partnership" proposals when the time is right.  You'll also dispel the negative stereotypes associated with nonprofits simply looking for handouts.

Let's face it, businesses want to associate with other strong businesses, whether they are for-profit or nonprofit.  If powerful corporations (with good brand reputations) see it as a benefit to align themselves with you, then you've already achieved a major victory.  The stronger your reputation, the louder your voice becomes.  The louder your voice becomes, the more people will hear you.  The more people that hear you, the greater the impact your message will have.  The greater the impact of your message has, the more people want to associate with you. The more people want to associate with you, the more revenue you are going to generate.  The circle never ends, it just gets bigger and perhaps a bit more complex as more corporate partners join the ranks.  However, the bigger the circle becomes the more leverage you have as well. 

Komen is a case study in how successful this type of strategy can become. They have done such an amazing job building brand equity that they are dictating sponsorship terms, not the other way around. I know...I worked with them when I was on the corporate side, and I understood the value the brand association with Komen would have on our reputation.

However, that brand strength didn't result organically. It took a great deal of work on Komen's part to position themselves as a change agent who could make things happen. They didn't do that by aligning themselves exclusively with other nonprofits. They did it by engaging the corporate sector, positioning themselves as a global leader in breast cancer research and then leveraging their brand reputation to further enhance their brand reputation, leading to critical corporate and foundation funding.  However, I think Komen is the exception, not the rule. 

Nonprofits need to have a better understanding of the power of their brands.  Unfortunately, few nonprofits place an emphasis on brand and reputation building.  In my opinion this is a result of few nonprofit leaders understanding the value and importance of a brand. 

The Millward Brown 2010 Value D Study found that 81% of consumers make purchasing decisions based on brand, while only 7% make purchasing decisions based on price.  What this tells me is that donors and corporations aren't afraid to give money to good nonprofits.  They're afraid to give money to good nonprofits they don't know or trust.  And that's what brand building is all about!

In today's economic climate businesses are placing a greater emphasis on corporate social responsibility not just to build brand loyalty, but to protect their brand reputations.  They need to align themselves with strong nonprofits because they want to convert nonprofit constituents into brand advocates. There is tremendous opportunity here for innovative nonprofit marketers who can find a way to get themselves "a seat at the corporate table". One of the best ways to do that is to start playing more in the corporate sandbox.  Go where they go, read what they read, find ways to lead corporate leaders rather than waiting for them to lead you.  Building your nonprofit brand starts with building your personal brand.  If you're a strong regional leader, your organiztion will be perceived similarly.

So if you want to make a real and measurable impact on your organization, don't stop networking with other nonprofits.  Just be sure to place as much emphasis on networking with your corporate peers.  Your seat at the table awaits you.

Crocs: Stylish? You decide. A marketing success story? You bet!

Okay, clearly I am not the target market for Crocs.  Personally, I think they are among the ugliest forms of footwear I've ever seen.  Though in fairness, I don't claim to be a fashion icon or stylist.  I haven't even purchased a new suit in two years.

However, from a business perspective, Crocs is a case study in how marketing can have an incredible and measurable impact on a brand's success; or in this case, a brand's turnaround.

A recent article, Crocs, Feeling the Love Again, on Brandchannel.com, discusses how Crocs' new CEO, John McCarvel, received a Stevie Award as the "Turnaround Executive of the Year" at the 2011 American Business Awards for successfully revitalizing the footwear brand, resulting in a 200% jump in stock value over the past three years. 

According to the article, here's how McCarvel transformed Crocs from a dying brand to a successful one...again:

• Cleaned up distribution channels — moving out of hardware stores and gas stations

• Controlled rip off copies, through the use of Crocs' propriety croslite technology that eliminates odors and helps the soft material conform to your foot

• Expanded product offerings to more than 250 styles including sneakers and boots, making it a viable four-season brand

• Opened 61 new retail stores worldwide

• Increased its online presence

• Reinvigorated its corporate social responsibly platform, Crocs Cares, focused on children and families in need

While McCarvel deserves due credit, I am excited to see how heavily he relied on marketing to play an instrumental role in the Crocs transformation.  New CMO, Andrew Davison, and his predecessor's fingerprints are all over the brand's CSR platform, distribution channel strategy, online presence, expanded product offerings and brick & mortar expansion. 

The New York Times also recently wrote about Crocs' successful new image campaign that helped launch the turnaround.

While I'm still not a big fan of the footwear, kudos to McCarvel and his marketing and product development teams for an amazing effort!

10 Things CEOs expect from their CMOs. How do you stack up?

Last week I blogged about a Fournaise study that found that 73% of all CEOs believe marketers lack credibility because they cannot quantify the value of their marketing efforts.

So the next logical blog post would be to share and comment on an article from MarketingWeek that outlines what CEOs expect from their CMOs.  If you can meet all of these expectations, then your CEO is probably in the 27% minority in the Fournaise study. 

How many of these expectations are you fulfilling?

1.  A focused financial steward
     - Do you manage your budget, maximise every dollar spent and measure ROI to the best of your ability and resources?
2.  A consistent innovator
     - Do you constantly look for new and different ways to communicate and strengthen the corporate brand, drive revenue or reach new audiences?
3.  A customer whisperer
     - Do you know who your customers are and what they want?  Do you know what the customer of your customer wants?
4.  A dedicated brand steward
     - Are you the protector of the brand (internally and externally)?  What steps do you take to ensure that the entire organization is protective of the brand as well as an advocate of the brand?
5.  A social media maven
     - Every business is trying to get on this bandwagon and you should be leading the way.  How much do you know about social media, and can you communicate the value to your business?
6.  A business strategist
     - Do you spend all of your time on marketing campaigns or do you get involved with, and understand the needs of other departments?  That broader understanding will not only get you a seat at the executive table, but also help improve your marketing efforts.
7.  A capable Crisis Communications Manager
     - How prepared are you for the unexpected?  Do you have a plan in place?  If so, do you share and practice that crisis management plan just as you would a fire drill?  When a crisis occurs, you're going to be expected to take the lead on protecting the corporate reputation.
8.  A data analyst
     - What data do you have access to that will help sell your marketing story internally?  If you don't have any analytics, you need to demand them, otherwise, you will always be fighting an uphill battle.
9.  A customer advocate
     - Too often when budgets are tight, or revenues slip, the easy solution is to sacrifice the needs of the customer to impact the bottom line.  How often do you fight to protect the people who are paying your bills?  The customer needs a voice.  Why not make it yours?
10.A motivator-in-chief
     - How much do you work to motivate your entire organization, not just the marketing team?  Do you work with HR on motivational initiatives?  Your customers are not just those on the other side of the cash register.  What efforts do you make to build loyalty with your internal customers?

This is a pretty big list!  How do you stack up?  Are you successfully delivering on these 10 demands?  I readily admit that there are some areas where I am stronger than others.  However, there is nothing on this list that every marketer shouldn't already expect of him/herself.

The key to success as a CMO is ensuring that you have an open dialogue with your CEO and that expectations are clear.  While I question whether many CEOs truly appreciate the value of marketing, the best way to solve that problem is to be proactive.  Make yourself heard by understanding your business and offering constructive solutions to problems.  Afterall, isn't that what marketers are supposed to do best? 

73% of CEOs think marketers lack credibility - Why?

A recent study by Fournaise found that almost 75% of all CEOs believe marketers lack credibility.  They think marketers place too much emphasis on brand values and brand equity without enough measurable data to prove how marketing drives revenue.

Will someone who feels this way please define success for me?  Define love.  Define the shade of gray.  If I got 100 definitions for each, they would all be different.  My point is that success, love and shades of gray are all subjective, yet the diversity of the definitions doesn't make them any less valid or accurate.

Marketing is a science that requires both creativity and access to data to accurately measure ROI.  Yes, sometimes measurement can be subjective, but often thats because the research needed to quantify its impact can take a significant amount of time or isn't given the proper infusion of resources (financial or otherwise). I can think of several companies (Amazon, Sony, Ford) that didn't make money coming out of the box.  It was continuous product development and marketing that ultimately led to their success. 

While I agree that every company should demand marketers understand and measure ROI and its impact on P & L, companies must also be willing to invest in the tools necessary to collect the required data.  If not, what analytics do CEOs want marketers to use?  The number of daily sales isn't a very accurate way to measure ROI if you don't know how many people are entering the store.

Additionally, the success of a marketing campaign can be directly impacted by internal or external variables that are often out of control of the marketing department. A campaign might increase store traffic by 100%, but if inventory management is poor, that campaign may have no impact on sales.

A good marketer will experiment with new communication channels like social media to determine their effectiveness, just as a medical researcher will experiment with a new drug to determine its effectiveness.  There are no guarantees that either will work.  So should a smart company just sit back and wait until the competition is effectively utilizing a new channel before making the decision to invest in it?  They could, but then they'd be fighting an uphill battle trying to win back the loyalty of the customers they lost to the competitor who was innovative enough to try something new.  We invest in research for new designs, new products and new systems every day without knowing what the outcomes will be.  Business requires calculated risk.  Marketing needs to be included in that equation.

Viewing marketers as lacking credibility is commonly the result of not understanding the science of marketing or not placing the proper emphasis on marketing.  Often companies will expect champagne results on beer budgets. But when goals aren't met, how often is the budget looked at as the problem?  I'm willing to bet not as often as the people. 

That is not to say that there aren't bad marketers out there who try to avoid quantifying their value.  I don't trust those guys anymore than the CEOs in the Fournaise study do.  Though I don't think the problem is any greater in marketing than in any other profession.  Can the value of HR or IT be quantified?  It's hard to do, but they are still valuable and necessary.  I've worked with many colleagues and business partners who weren't worth the paper their paychecks were written on, and I can think of several occasions when the marketing department bailed out other divisions without getting the credit it was due.

Marketing & ROI measurement should always go hand in hand, but expecting it without providing the proper tools and a willingness to take calculated risks is neither smart nor sustainable.

So before CEOs view marketers as lacking credibility, perhaps they should take the time to understand and invest in marketing first.  I'm willing to bet that those who do are probably not reflected in the 73% identified in the study.

PASSION! Do your customers have it?

Passion...

According to Webster's Dictionary, passion means, "an intense, driving, or overmastering feeling or conviction".

We all experience passion from time to time.  Some of us more often and more intensely than others.  Sometimes passion is a good thing; other times...not so good.  It can cause us to act with emotion rather than logic or reason.  It can lead to unimaginable achievement, or unmitigated failure.  Whether good or bad, passion generates action.

We've all heard the phrase, "Love me or hate me, but spare me your indifference".  In business, the worst reaction you want to your brand is indifference.  It will be the death of you.  So building passion for your product should be the first step in establishing brand loyalty.

According to a recent study by SAY Media, TRU and ComScore, brands, especially those using using social media, need to find "passionate voices" more than ever.

- Consumers who identify themselves as 'very interested' [or passionate] about a category follow at least 10 "voices" [brand advocates and brand devotees] in that category.

- 83% of these followers tell friends or family about products/brands they like

But how do you build that passion within your customers?  That's a difficult question to answer because passion is driven by any number of personal and very subjective factors.  Passion can come from consumer emphasis on cost, convenience, comfort, ease, taste, quality...the list goes on and on.  However, the simple and all encompassing answer is "value", or more specifically, "significant value". 

In order to provide significant value, businesses need to place greater emphasis on the consumer end of the demand chain. Identify how your customers define significant value.  Don't just find out why they buy your product/service; find out why they LOVE your product/service (or what would result in them loving your product or service) and then give it to them in spades. 

Social media is a great tool for identifying where the passion lies with your customers and who those "passionate voices" are. Your advocates are out there.  How often do you converse with them?  Find those voices, follow them, cultivate them and support their efforts to advocate on your behalf.  Geo-social platforms like Foursquare or Places are great channels for rewarding your "passionate voices", but simple customer engagement is a passion builder as well.  Let them know their voices are being heard.  Loyalty isn't always established through rewards.  It's just as often built through appreciation and trust.  A combination can create a passionate voice that will never go silent.

What are you doing to generate passion?

Your Personal Brand Doesn't Have an "OFF" Switch

Developing a personal brand is a "must" these days as you navigate your future.

A strong personal brand can be good for business, your career and your life.  A poor personal brand can result in a reputation that makes you and your company taboo. To develop a personal brand, you need to identify how you want to be perceived and then work day and night to build that identity.  However, far too many people tend to believe that a personal brand only exists in business meetings. 

In today's digital world, your brand is not just a reflection of how you perform when people are around.  If you actively engage in social media, your personal brand is engaging with you.  Your brand is on display for the entire world to see anytime you're on Facebook, Linkedin or Twitter. Before I post anything online I always ask myself if there is anyone who might see the post that would cause me or someone else embarrassment.  If the answer is "yes", then it won't go up. 

Your brand is always on display offline as well.  If you run into a business colleague at the supermarket on a Sunday afternoon, your brand is standing right beside you.  Do you care if your colleague sees you unshaven in a ripped tee shirt and flip flops?  Some people may, others may not.  Only you can define the parameters of your personal brand.

However, your personal brand doesn't have an "off" switch that you can just flip when you leave the office.  We're all constantly being judged and we're all constantly judging others, whether we'll openly admit or not.

Recently, I was invited to visit the home of a colleague who lives there with his wife and son.  The wife uses the basement as an office for her business.  My colleague apparently failed to communicate with his wife that I would be stopping by so she was very surprised when I was escorted into her office to say "hello".  She graciously welcomed me, but was clearly a bit bothered by the unexpected visit.  I felt bad as either she forgot I was coming or her husband forgot to tell her.  They actually spoke about the misunderstanding in front of me which made me a little uncomfortable. 

I'm sure one of the reasons the wife was troubled when she saw me was because her office was a mess!  It was in complete disarray.  I would never want to have a client or colleague in my office if it looked the way hers did.  Boxes were everywhere, piles of paper on the floor, food on the desk, drawers and cabinets hanging open, clothes piled up in the corner.  She was a bit disheveled since she probably had no meetings scheduled that day. She simply didn't have the polished look I was used to seeing.  While I'm sure she had no intention of creating that scenario, I couldn't help but wonder if she ran her business that way.  If she couldn't even keep her own office organized, how did she keep her client's needs and projects organized?  I'm sure she was quite embarrassed. 

While I understand that this was her home, which most of us rightly view as our personal sanctuary, it was also her place of business.  And in business, you never know when something unexpected is going to occur, so you always have to plan for those occasions.

Though we aren't close, I have known this woman for several years so my impression of her wasn't dramatically altered.  But what if it wasn't someone who knew her as long as I have that walked into the room that day?  What if it was a prospective client?  I'm sure that being incredibly sloppy and unorganized is not the impression she would have wanted to make.

My point is that one's personal brand is a reflection of who you are and how you are perceived whether you like it or not and whether you are prepared for it or not.  You have to be "on" all the time.  Now that doesn't mean you have to wear a business suit whenever you go out to the supermarket or that you can't show a little passion when watching your favorite sporting event.  But it does mean that you need to recognize that others are passing judgment on you 24/7, not just between 9 and 5.  Your personal brand is always under the microscope.

Is there a bit of paranoia attached to maintaining a personal brand?  Perhaps "paranoia" is too strong a word.  But in a world where first impressions AND second impressions count, you have to remain vigilant in building and protecting your reputation.  You never know when an opportunity may pass you by because you let your guard down for just a moment.

What's the old saying?  "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time.  But you can't fool all of the people all of the time." 

Why Doing More with Less Is a Fallacy!

"You need to do more with less!"

That's a demand that you hear often in business these days; especially in marketing. However, is it really possible?  Does it even make sense?  Can you actually do more with less?

You can’t bake a bigger cake with less flour…unless…you use more icing!

You can’t build a stronger house with less wood…unless…you use brick!

You can’t make a car run without gas…unless…it’s an electric car!

The point of these three metaphors is to emphasize that you really can't take away resources and expect that someone is going to be able to do more with what remains.  That's simply illogical.  However, by making better use of other resources (adding a pound of icing may make a cake appear bigger even though it really isn't), by reevaluating your strategy (perhaps brick is a better resource than wood for building a house, but you just hadn't considered it before) or by eliminating barriers (if a gas operated car isn't optimal, then switch to an electric car), you can still achieve success, even though a previous resource may be less available.
 
When my media budget was dramatically slashed a few years ago, I was forced to find a new way to communicate the value of shopping at Goodwill retail stores.  I couldn't get more advertising for my limited spending.  Most of the radio and TV stations we were using were angry that we made the cuts!  They weren't about to go out of their way to give me more ads for less money.  Therefore, we had to look at alternatives.  We decided to invest more time and resources into social and earned media.  That decision made a huge impact on how Goodwill stores were perceived and resulted in a significant amount of visibility worth far more than we could have purchased through a traditional media buy.  So while we didn't get more paid media by spending less on it, we ultimately received a greater return on our investment by changing our strategy and placing more emphasis on another communications channel that cost less money.  Our message didn't change. Only the way we communicated it did.  Additionally, we removed a critical barrier by eliminating staff that simply weren't cutting the mustard.  We had to create a fast moving, well oiled machine.  If we didn't have people who were capable of keeping up with us, we found new people who could.  Your biggest asset is the people around you.  Don't let them slow you down.
 
So if anyone tells you that they need you to do more with less, what they really mean is you need to find new and innovative ways of marketing your product or service that don't require as much reliance on the resource/s being cut.

After all, you can't empty a pond of its fish and expect to keep bringing home dinner...unless....you start fishing in another pond.

Recent Study Shows Brand Heavily Outweighs Price on the Value Scale!

In a recent BizReport article, Helen Leggatt writes about how brand now heavily outweighs price on the value scale.



Where do you fall on the value scale?



The findings of a Millward Brown's Value-D study show that only 7% of respondents made purchases based on price (down from 20 percent ten years ago), while 81% made purchasing decisions based on the brand.

According to Peter Walshe, Global BrandZ Director for Millward Brown, "Too many brands fail to fully optimize their power and instead overemphasize price and downplay desire. The consumer usually desires a brand first and then considers the price to determine whether to purchase or not."

The article goes on to list the Global Top 10 Value-D brands:

1. Amazon
2. Colgate
3. Nokia
4. Pampers
5. Visa
6. Coca-Cola
7. Microsoft
8. McDonald's
9. Nescafé
10. Lidl

To see the Top 100 Global Brands or top geographic rankings, view the BrandZ report.

While brand has always played a big part in the value equation, I'm surprised that it so heavily outweighs other purchase drivers such as price, location, convenience and habit, especially during the recent and sustained economic downturn.  Though during tough times consumers often tend to take fewer risks, which means they are perhaps more likely to rely on brands they trust. 

Do your purchasing habits match the Value-D study?  Is the brand more important to you than the price?  I'm going to have to do a little self-analysis to see where I tend to lean on the value scale.

When will companies ever learn that "opt-out" kills!

I got a wonderful email today from Whirlpool.  They were kind enough to inform me that their corporate privacy policy had changed in November of last year.  Specifically, Whirlpool's e-mail communication policy has gone from "opt-in" to "opt-out". 

It was nice of them to notify me of this change three months after it was made. If Whirlpool sent me any notifications prior to making the change, I don't recall them.  But maybe that was the intent.

The timing is amazing, because I have been busy this week trying to unsubscribe from the DAILY emails I get from FTD.  Geez, for a florist, they sure do have a penchant for sending out emails.  I'm guessing that the person responsible for developing FTD's email strategy must be a volunteer, because I can't believe anyone would actually get paid for creating such a horrible email communication plan.

I don't mind receiving offers or gentle reminders when holidays are approaching that might require purchasing flowers, like Valentine's Day or Mother's Day.  But the onslaught of daily emails only resulted in complete frustration!  I got tired of hitting "delete" day after day, and finally went to their website multiple times to try and unsubscribe.  Does FTD think that this type of marketing is going to turn me into a loyal customer?  If so, then they truly don't understand permission marketing or brand loyalty.  I will probably never purchase from them again because I don't want to fall victim to another tsunami of emails.

Whirlpool will likely run into the same problem if they begin force-feeding unwanted messages to anyone who has the audacity to contact them.  Nothing will turn off a consumer faster than an in-box filled with unsolicited emails from the same company.  Perhaps they think that because they are FTD and/or Whirlpool, that we want to bury ourselves in their branded communications.  However, if they don't rethink their opt out strategy, the only thing they'll be burying is their profits.

Please marketers, do yourself a favor...don't adopt an opt-out strategy for your email communications.  It just seems illogical to require consumers to choose "not to communicate with you". 

Do Facebook ads work?

Much like every other marketing channel, the answer to that question depends upon your goals. 

However, here are a few "positives and negatives" to consider before investing in Facebook ads:

POSITIVE+

1.  To most Americans under the age of 35, Facebook is one of their top 3 communication platforms

2.  74% of Facebook users are on the site multiple times per day

3.  Facebook ads can be geographically targeted.  You are not committed to buying national ads if you're a local business

 

4.  Facebook ads can be further micro-targeted though the use of member provided demographic and psychographic data (this is very different from key word searches on Google or Yahoo)

5.  You can manage your budget by placing a cap on the amount you want to spend per day, or pay only for each click

6.  The Facebook Responder Demographics Report will give you info on who is reviewing or taking action on your ad so you can measure its targeting effectiveness

7.  Almost 54% of Facebook users do not have a negative opinion of Facebook ads

8.  Facebook ads can be a strong lead generation source, provided you are driving users to your own Facebook page since the majority of Facebook users prefer ads that keep them inside Facebook

NEGATIVE-
1.  Not an effective a way to reach Gen Xers or Baby Boomers...yet

2.  Though click through rates (CTR) are typically not high anywhere, Facebook ad click through rates have been reported as low as 0.01 – 0.05% (However, strategic content and user rewards can have a positive measurable impact on click through rates)

3.  Using impressions as a form of measurement is subjective at best.  Just because your ad is on the page a member happens to be visiting, doesn't mean the ad is actually being noticed

4.  If your business is a dating site or an educational program, FB ad statistics don't look good for you

5.  FB ads are typically not a good source if you're trying to build traffic to a non-Facebook site


So are Facebook ads right for your business?  Only you can decide, but go into it with your eyes open.  Personally, I have had some measurable success using Facebook ads, but my goals were simple: Brand awareness and lead generation. And the level of success fluctuated based upon the location and length of the campaign.

I suggest gathering supportive data, and analyzing a few case studies before making an investment.  But as a general rule of thumb, I wouldn't recommend making Facebook your only advertising channel.

Print media needs more than diversification to survive!

According to a recent Biz Report article by Kristina Knight, A new report from the American Press Institute and ITZBelden shows that the flagging print media industry can survive if it diversifies the channels it is offering its advertisers.

The API/ITZBelden report states that "media companies - newspapers, magazines, etc. - offering a broad range of services - online, print, etc. - serve the needs of local businesses better. Local businesses, according to the report, are looking for a kind of ad-agency-approach, which newspapers can offer by giving more choices to the local advertiser."  The key, according to the report, "is in understanding where each local business will get the biggest advertising benefit."

Forgive my cynicism, but is this really a surprise to anyone?  I suppose it's nice that the report confirms what every print media outlet (and most marketers) have known for quite some time now, but I don't think this is a watershed moment.

There are two bigger issues that the print media industry needs to address to solve its advertising challenges, as I see it.

First, finding sales and marketing teams that know how to sell a diverse advertising portfolio; and second, finding a way to compete with other traditional and burgeoning marketing channels that are much less expensive.

The cost of a full page black and white ad in The Washington Post can go for as much as $100,000.  For the same amount of money in the DC market, I can buy a fairly robust six month radio campaign with a frequency much greater than "1", or a very large, geo-targeted Facebook campaign generating millions of impressions and thousands of click throughs.  To be fair, the price of a print ad will be less in smaller markets, but so will the cost of other advertising channels.  Print advertising is still wildly overpriced for a dying medium even when packaged with digital offerings. 

So - can print advertising survive through diversification?  Sure.  But at what point do you stop calling it "print"?

CMO vs. CIO: Who rules the digital world at your company?

Last week, I received a call from a colleague in Canada asking for my opinion on the role of IT in the development and management of an organization's digital and web based initiatives.  She was being challenged over that role by her new CIO who felt that the IT department should be managing content as well as technical support.  I told her quickly and candidly that I didn't think IT should play any role at all in the content management of our digital initiatives, and that they should play only a supporting role in the development of those initiatives. I think my exact words were, "they should help ensure that we have the technical resources and bandwidth to achieve our objectives."

Shortly after having this conversation, I stumbled across an interesting article on the animosity between CMOs and CIOs over the challenges of meeting customer expectations in a digital world.  It suddenly dawned on me that this was a real issue for many organizations.

According to a recent study by Accenture and the CMO Council, "69% of marketers said the CMO should be the primary leader of digital marketing, and only 19% of them see the CIO and the IT department important to defining digital marketing strategy. However, 58% of IT executives see themselves as the true champions of digital marketing."

I guess I'm fortunate that I've not experienced these challenges at my organization.  Our CIO and I are both in lockstep on what needs to be done to try and improve the quality of the customer experience both on and offline, and who is responsible for the technical development and content management of our digital initiatives.  We actually share the same primary frustrations as most organizations:  limited time and resources.  Though we have a common vision and work well together.

However, my belief has always been that marketing is the manager of the message and how the message is delivered.  IT's role should be to provide the technical infrastructure and resources necessary to maximize the marketing department's ability to deliver that message in a manner that is most convenient and appealing to the consumer. 

If you can, download the executive summary from the Accenture study linked to above.  I think you'll find it a compelling read.

What role does the CIO play in the development and management of your digital marketing initiatives?  Have you been faced with challenges similar to my colleague's?  If so, what have you done to mitigate the fallout and create a collaborative environment?

Why are you paying to distribute digital coupons?

I've been reading a lot of stories lately about the popularity of online coupon sites like Living Social and Groupon.  As a consumer, I can see why these sites have value.  Who wouldn't want to get substantial discounts at local and national retailers, restaurants, theaters and other businesses?

But do online coupon sites have value for the advertiser?  According to some articles, small businesses that have used the sites are questioning the benefits of offering big discounts in the hopes of converting prospects into customers, when the costs are so high, and their level of control is so low.  Living Social and Groupon charge a huge fee for posting discounts on their sites.  To generate a measurable return, businesses need to start with large margins and/or hope that a significant percentage of consumers who redeem the offers will return at some point ready to pay full price.  The retailer also needs to hope that the coupon offer doesn't alienate the business' loyal customers who are already paying full price and are not being rewarded for doing so.

As a business, one of the competitive advantages of using location based social media platforms like Foursquare or Places is that a retailer can offer digital coupons, at no cost, to anyone who happens to be near one of its locations.  Additionally, the retailer controls the amount of time the discount is offered, how many coupons it wishes to distribute and whether or not it wants to require the user to "check in" multiple times before he or she can access the coupon, thereby significantly increasing the possibility of repeat business. 

While coupon sites like Groupon may presently have more members worldwide (35 million), they don't offer the geographic convenience of geo-based sites like Foursquare.  Granted, Foursquare offers aren't delivered directly to the consumers email inbox, but by simply logging onto a geo-site through a smart phone, a consumer can immediately identify any retailer in his/her vicinity that is offering a special. Therefore, any perceived inconvenience with redeeming the coupon is mitigated by the retailer's proximity to the user.  And there is no 24 hour wait for the coupon download.  It pops up on a smart phone ready to use.  Additionally, if the consumer wants to share his or her experience with friends, they can easily do so on geo-sites; a benefit that sites like Groupon and Living Social don't provide.

So if you're interested in distributing digital coupons to drive new business, don't be misled.  Big coupon sites like Groupon, WOW and Living Social aren't your only options.  Nor are they necessarily your best options. It's only a matter of time before burgeoning platforms like Foursquare or Places become the preferred digital coupon distribution channel for small businesses...and probably even large ones.

So your company has multiple social media sites and a mobile app...but how are they contributing to the bottom line?

Yes, every marketer believes that you need to be well entrenched in social media to be competitive in today's customer-centric business environment.

While most marketers are still unsure what to do with their social media channels and how to measure or monetize them, they are still convinced that they need to be there.  Hmmm...sounds like a similar conundrum that business experienced about 10-12 years ago during the dot com boom.  Everyone had to have a website right?  But how did you measure its success?  A lot of businesses are STILL trying to answer that question.

In any case, I'm a firm believer in social and digital media, though my philosophy on measurement may not be consistent with many.  While the measurement methodology you choose can depend upon how far along your social media constituents are in the customer lifecycle; based on the relative recency of consumer activation through our digital channels, I don't believe that monetization of our social media initiatives is a necessity...yet.  I think the value is in the acquisition and cultivation of advocates for the product or service.  I tend to measure success today based on blog readers and retention, Facebook comments, Twitter retweets, app downloads and usage.  To me, this activity indicates whether my constituents are finding our content useful.  Strong (and positive) activity should result in greater brand loyalty and advocacy.  However, I recognize that even this form of measurement has its limitations.  Remember that most participants are "lurkers".  This means that they read your social media content, but don't actively participate by responding, posting or retweeting.  They simply appreciate the content for what it is.  Their lack of activity doesn't mean they shouldn't have value to your organization.  They may actually be your best customers. 

So what's the answer?  How do you prove that digital media has value to the sales process? 

One method may be the growth of marketing automation services.  Marketing automation can be a great tool for marketers who are struggling to integrate all of their digital media channels in order to ensure message and brand consistency, assess and deliver on customer needs, improve content quality and evolve from reactive to proactive.

According to a recent article by Erich Flynn, CEO of Treehouse Interactive posted on CMO.com, "One of the biggest benefits of using a marketing automation solution is that it has the potential to put sales and marketing teams on the same page. The ability to define what a lead really is and then use your marketing automation system to qualify, nurture and pass along those leads is a basic benefit. In 2010 there will be many integrations between marketing automation and CRM systems that will change how teams work together to close business."

Therefore, integrated marketing automation should enable marketers to better monetize the value of their digital channels because the data available through those channels can have a direct and measurable impact on revenue contribution.

Will marketing automation services be the ultimate solution to the question of social media monetization and customer conversion?  Don't know yet, but its certainly intriguing. 

When did the US government get into the pizza consulting business?

A recent article in the New York Times revealed that the U.S. Department of Agriculture was involved in consulting and recommending to Domino's Pizza that it add 40% more cheese to its pies!

I didn't realize that the government was in the pizza consulting business, but I could spend days discussing that.

According to the article, "Dairy Management, the 'consultant' [hired by Domino's] which has made cheese its cause, is not a private business consultant at all. It is a marketing creation of the United States Department of Agriculture".  Yes, the very same Department of Agriculture responsible for leading the government's national anti-obesity campaign.  Talk about "speaking out of both sides of your mouth"!

One slice of Domino's pizza has as much as 2/3rds the recommended daily allowance of saturated fat.  So, on the one hand, the USDA is recommending to the nation's largest pizza chain that it add significantly more cheese to its pies, while on the other hand, recommending that Americans eat less saturated fat, something cheese has in abundance.  Obviously, I'm not the only one that sees some inconsistencies here that could be potentially problematic for Domino's, but highly problematic for the federal government.  Unfortunately, we're talking about a federal agency.  Traditionally, federal agencies have never seemed to be too concerned about their reputations.  They let congress worry about that.

Here's my favorite quote from the article:  "The department acknowledged that cheese is high in saturated fat, but said that lower milk consumption had made cheese an important source of calcium. 'When eaten in moderation and with attention to portion size, cheese can fit into a low-fat, healthy diet'."

I get such a kick out of health and dietary ads that use the disclaimer, "with proper diet and exercise".  The fact is that if everyone maintained a healthy diet and exercised regularly, there would be no need for dietary supplements or weight loss pills.  With "proper diet and exercise", I could probably take diet pills made of bacon fat and still lose weight.

The government is bad enough when dealing with bureaucratic legislative and regulatory issues.  I really wish they would stay out of the marketing business.  They're going to give us all a bad name.  Next thing you know, they'll be selling used cars or launching an airline.