Enlightened Conflict

Tag Archives: creativity overcomes clutter

shopper behavior farmers markets

July 6th, 2012

Well. I have a farmers market near me. But I don’t go often. Yet, whenever I do go, I immediately think “I should come here more often.”

I love shopping at a Framers Market.

I must be in a minority (oh … but in the majority at the same time).

These are US numbers so it may be different elsewhere.

Only about 2% of people say they use a Farmers Market as their primary shop location.

And about 37% say it is a secondary shop location.

Oh. And about 61% of people visit a Farmers Market at least once annually.

Ok.

What that means is … well … 2 things …

  1. (this is a guess) the majority of the shoppers are thinking “this is awesome . I should shop here more often”, and
  2. (this is factual) that as you wander into a framers market (at least in the USA) about 2/3rds of the people you see wandering around in front of you are not regular shoppers.

I struggle to think of such an odd contradiction elsewhere between attitude <extremely positive> and behavior <lack of active action despite such a huge positive attitude>.

Anyway. What it really means is that about 2/3rds of the shoppers are driven by impulse shopping.

And let me tell ya right here and now … if you doubt that the senses drive shopping behavior than you have not been to a farmer’s market lately <and you should go>.

Spices, seafood, cheeses, fresh vegetables, flowers … the smells are almost overwhelming … in a good way. And it all affects what you thought you would buy versus what you actually will buy. You may plan on buying some core items, or possibly have some items on your ‘I want to find’ list but your basket at checkout has significantly more items and a significant portion of unplanned <impulse> items.

Research shows the number one reason why people go to a Farmers Market is food quality (safety from food borne illness a relatively close second … which I have no clue what that means).

The least important factors were availability of pesticide-free and hormone-free food products and ability to do one stop shopping <the first two kind of surprised me a little and the last didn’t … although given real shopping behavior – the fact most people shop several places – I am not sure the last really matters>.

Interestingly, at least to me, in research the typical shopper seems to skew older (mean age about 46 years old). Maybe I should have known that but my perception was it would be a little lower.

Regardless. I did find some of this really interesting.

Among shoppers surveyed:

• 75% came to market to do more than shop. <so … it is an experience>

• 55% felt the market increased their connection to the community.

• 99% believed the market improves the health of the community <people feel good having one around>.

• 53% believed the market improves perceptions of the neighborhood.

Reasons shoppers came to the market other than to shop include, not surprisingly, “to eat,” “the market atmosphere,” convenience, the desire to support local growers, the appeal of low-cost organic produce, and as a social place to meet and be with others.

Shoppers made comments such as:

• “I wouldn’t come to the area without it.”

• “I feel more comfortable, less intimidated at the market.”

• “I see people I didn’t know existed.”

• “My blood pressure went from 220 to 140!”

Among the findings, there are several worth noting:

• 74% of adults were introduced to new foods at the market <Farmers Markets improve consumers’ food knowledge>.

• 34% of adults described how they shop less often at grocery stores since becoming farmers market shoppers. These responses seem to suggest that the market triggers behavioral change in consumers <the research company theorizes that market shoppers evolve. Over time, they grow more confident in their food choices; ask more questions from other shoppers, chefs, and farmers; and begin to reorient their consumption habits around the seasonality of local foods>.

All the research aside … the social aspect of Farmers Markets is powerful. It is relaxing and social. When is the last time you have ever heard that about grocery shopping being “relaxing, lowering blood pressure or social”?

Oh. And, oddly, it may also be the strongest factor more people do NOT use Farmer’s Markets more often. Huh? Most people like to be social sometimes <on their own terms>… and more importantly they don’t want to ‘think’ grocery shopping is going to take long before going (but are more than willing to make it longer once there). All that means is that people love Farmers Markets. They associate ‘more time’ before they even go and that creates a barrier … even though if we actually decide to suck it up and go … we actually like the time spent.

Oh. We wacky people. I wonder if we ever stop thinking long enough to actually enjoy the things we want to enjoy. Well. If we ever do? Farmers Markets will be bulging with people.

Me? I am going to think less and go more.

but how about?

June 11th, 2012

Ok.

This post is a cross between an observation and a rant.

The observation: How often businesses get trapped in the “but how about?” type discussions. Note. “But how about this?” is just another version of “why shouldn’t we build/service/do this?”

The rant: It is amazing how often the question is generated by one of two things:

1. A new trend or fad or publicized widget need that someone in a flash of brilliance says “hey we can do that!”

… or

2. It is available as an opportunity with the appearance of possible sales (possible profits but that is another discussion that still amazes me).

Well. Point 1 is particularly dangerous because chasing trends/fads is like chasing the Roadrunner <and you are Wile Coyote>. You won’t catch it. oh. And if you do, your plan won’t most likely work anyway.

Point 2 is particularly complex because product extensions, innovations and a whole mess of internal twister-like maneuvers shouldn’t <in general> be dictated by external stimulus.

Regardless. Constantly bringing up the question is wasted energy <the majority of the time>.

Here is the core issue at hand.

Too often businesses struggle to find their sense of self. And it’s kind of nuts because, with regard to this discussion, business is actually pretty easy.

Decide who you are and what you are good at.

Oh. And that doesn’t mean saying “we are a nice company with values and we are good at everything.”

My main issue with this topic is that if I can set up guardrails, or, at minimum, recognize that direction guardrails are important, why can’t businesses?  Its nuts.

Look. I am going to use myself as an example because, as noted above, I don’t easily deal with guardrails … I often find them constricting.

Yet. I get paid more often than not for simply saying “no” to “how about?” Yeah. I get paid to stay within guardrails <go figure>. And I am not smarter than the average bear (yogi bear reference).

Look.

My strength is identifying and creating creative solutions to challenges-problems. I can do it in my sleep. Any time. Any business. Any where.

What that means is my weakness is staying the course – staying on mission-vision-whatever you want to call it. (Note: sorry folks. No one is strong at everything. If you have a strength identify it and you can always identify the related weakness. Don’t worry. You can always compensate for it. ). I envision, using hindsight, that because that was my strength when I was younger I probably went out of my way to create challenges/problems to solve (which most likely drove some of my groups nuts). This didn’t mean I created work … but rather sifted through a lot to uncover a ‘situation/problem’ to solve. Probably out of dumb luck I created some viable issues to pursue and inevitably my groups were known for proactive innovative thinking (hey…I found the silver lining).

Anyway.  In recognizing my weakness I compensate by having a strong process for identifying the core positioning-mission-core competency. By doing that I can leave my strength – solving this issue – unfettered. It revolves around the process but the solution is not driven by the process. Now. My process may allow a little more latitude than some others (think of it as designing a five lane autobahn versus a one lane drag race track) but it sets up guardrails.

And that is what is frustrating.

Because, once again, I can set up guardrails, or, at minimum, recognize that direction guardrails are important, why can’t businesses?  <fill in your own answer here because I don’t have one>.

And then because businesses cannot figure out this sense of self then some brand-voodoo-magicians <i.e., consultants> come along and use sleight of hand bullshit that only confuses businesses.

Thought for everyone. Don’t be confused. It is simple.

A company owns its character, core competency and crap they sell. Consumer owns the brand. Therefore as a business you focus on what you can control. It’s the guardrail thing I mentioned. I promise companies if they stay within their guardrails that buyers will inevitably forge a brand that is within the guardrails. And dealing with “how abouts?” becomes incredibly easy because while some bonehead is presenting a whizbang prezi presentation (with augmented reality to really wow you) outlining all the sales reasons a company should do something it comes down to the guardrails. Because (and I have told dozens of companies this – albeit some listen and some don’t) if the dollars and cents reside outside the guardrails it becomes a gamble. It becomes the Kentucky derby of business decisions.  Which sucks because most companies don’t breed racing horses.

Anyway. Having been around the block a couple of times here is why I believe a sense of self keeps getting missed:

1. Lazy thinking. “We are good with retail business” is a prime example. Lazy, lazy, lazy thinking. Because not all retail is the same. A franchise retail is different than a corporate retail. A grocer retail is very different from a cellular retail. A one location retail is different from a 1500 location retail.  The list goes on. Anyone can select a big bucket to sit your ass in … and it is a waste of time in terms of actually being meaningful in terms of truly understanding your ‘self.’

2. Everything to everyone. Well. Ok. Not trying to be everything, but rather in self reflection believing you are capable of everything. This is the infamous “We can figure it out when it happens. We always have.” Yeah. Well. Maybe. But probably not. The truth is if you really really think about it the business is actually good at something. There is something within the shit you pulled off (sometimes by the hair on your chinny chin chin) that provides a commonality that you should invest the time in figuring out.

Yup. It will actually help you do better in the future. And will help you hire better people (ok … it just may make you better at hiring the right people).

3. “I am going to miss something” (or the “moving sense of self” syndrome). Uh oh. As soon as you put a stake in the ground … it means someone will not want to plant themselves next to you on that ground. Why? They may not realize it immediately but the more they review the landscape they realize that they don’t want to plant their butts there. <Hint: that is okay.>

Next. A fact: it bugs the shit out of the ‘stake placer’ to be spurned (even if it is a bad match). As soon as spurning happens this company wants to pull up its stake and run around looking for a place to put the stake that would be appealing to the ‘spurner’ (i.e., for that one business opportunity).

The conclusion: Just put the stake thru your heart (or thru whomever cannot stay with the original good thought).

Ok. And beyond  the silly business misdirection I imagine it, at its worst, could come down to 2 things (primarily):

- not defining the guardrails in the first place

- not believing in the guardrails that were established.

Both are quite solvable but that’s not what this post is about. It’s about the fact that the majority of businesses fall into 1 or 2 and invest a shitload of energy in “how about?”

So … how about this?

That’s stupid.

In the end.

Beyond the stupidity comment … I could start a ‘who’s who’ list of companies who seemingly get seduced into discussing dreams or what ifs with regard to who they are <as a company> rather than insuring they know what they do and who they currently are. It is not only wasted energy but, even more importantly, potentially disastrous.

Oh. And please do not confuse this questioning with “whats next?’ because that question is usually a reflection of someone who is standing on some solid “this is who I am and what I do well” discussing what they want to do next.

By the way … advertising agencies are the absolute worst offenders of this issue … but … I am amazed on how many of all businesses fall into this discussion category.

Oh. The profit thing. I usually cut to the chase pretty fast on this one. Yes. Someone certainly knows how to make money on ‘x’ because they are doing it (and it appears they are making money). No. That does not mean we know how to do it and make money. There are a lot of business people who just say “we will figure it out if we actually get the opportunity.”. Well it doesn’t work that way. Or. Maybe better said it is more difficult than that simplistic point of view. Some things can be figured out (some not). Some things can be figured out but take time to do so (and what do you do in the interim?).  But. A company needs to figure it out. A wise man once said this:

“Most agencies are in the same boat — from big ones to two man shops. They’re in it for the money and they’re scared. Scared the client’s going to walk. And because they are afraid they compromise their principles. They are so scared of losing the business they give the customer what they think they want rather than what they know he needs. And sometimes it works — for a while. But in the end it always backfires. You lose the business anyway and you wake up one day to find you’re a prostitute. So, in the end, stick to your principles. ‘to thine ownself be true.’ 0ver 200 years old but still good advice.” – Stephen Hawley Martin (founder of The Martin Agency)

Ok.

Just to be sure my rant wasn’t too far off base I did find a study from Prophet <who I sometimes respect>.

New Prophet Study: Execs Understand That Customer Engagement Is Pressuring Brands To Perform Better — But Many Don’t Think Their Marketers Can Handle the Challenge

“The majority (55 percent) of participating senior executives in general management and marketing said that supporting business growth through a well-differentiated and relevant brand positioning was their most pressing concern,” said Mike Leiser, Prophet senior partner.

  • Targeting customers in this environment is problematic; three-fourths of respondents said they’re not doing it effectively. Over 90 percent are targeting more than one segment, and over half of these do so with multiple positionings of a single brand. Importantly, however, those multiple positionings are similar – what’s different among most in this group are the tactics used in bring them to life.

“Adjusting to this changing landscape will be a process,” Leiser said. “Our findings show that marketers must adapt a more visionary orientation to more effectively guide their organizations through it.”

So.

Gosh. Maybe I am not as dumb as I look.

when down is up

February 13th, 2012

Ok.

Some times I believe economists and marketing people take the same voodoo math classes (assuming they actually take math). What do mean? Somehow through voodoo math they can both show everyone that down is up. No shit. Really. Down isn’t down … it is really up (if only my bank balance could implement that math).

Examples.

Unemployment is down this month (but its still up versus a year ago).

Sales are down (but it’s up versus the rest of the category).

WTF.

So let me stick with business.

Let’s be clear.

When is down, well, up?

(Answer to that question)

NEVER.

Down is down.

Down is bad.

Down is never the objective.

If i hear one more time “… well Mr. Giraffeney, it’s a tough economy right now. The category is trending downward at 11%, but we are only down 5%. So we are doing well in a tough category. In fact … <insert pregnant pause here> … we are actually up when you look  it that way.”

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm …

(Mr. Giraffeney after a minute or so) “So our sales are down … but not really down? I love it!”

What a load of bullshit.

To me negative is down.

And bad (because it isn’t up).

To be fair it is easy to talk your way into the down but not really down rabbit hole of economic unreality (in fact … I say hanging my head sheepishly … I have done it myself years ago).

It is extremely easy to justify ‘down but not down’ by saying if people aren’t spending, it must be ok that they are not spending with us. And that if times are tight than that must be the reason they don’t value our brand as much (or any brand).

Anyway.

It may be easy to fall into this double speak but it is bullshit.

Here is something to chew on.

Business is out there. People are buying stuff. and there are plenty of people buying stuff.

Yeah. Even today.

Plenty of companies are gaining market share and there are a boatload of profitable companies (flush with cash by the way). And there are a lot of companies with increased  sales.

We have an extremely robustly sized eceonomy out there my friends.

I say all this because it can be easy to justify doing what you are doing a variety of ways … and saying down isn’t really down is a way a lot of people do so.

Stop. Just stop.

Up is attainable.

You may just have to be a little smarter to get it.

“Smarter” almost always resides in appealing to consumer needs without losing sight of the fact you have to make money … profit. You cannot (and should not) discount your way to success. That path is a very slippery slope not only from consumer attitudes perspective (defining how they value you) but it is also puts a massive strain on profitability (which impacts the organization like a bad ripple effect).

You have to be smart and insightful with how you talk with people you want to buy your stuff.  Maybe you need to seek a new role, or a differently defined role, that is more vital and easier for consumers to rationalize. And, god forbid, tell the truth & have something worth paying for.

Here is a fact.

People will spend against need – real or perceived.

They also search for value, but that doesn’t mean people will not spend premiums for quality. Or spend more money for a perceived need (which is actually a “want” instead if I was going to be technical with myself).

Look at SUVs, Starbucks, Apple and Whole Foods markets.

All doing quite well thank you very much.

This is simply finding growth under pressure.

Persistent sales stagnation is most likely a reflection of how people perceive needing what you have to offer more likely than it is “the economy.”

(sorry to burst anyone’s excuse bubble with that).

Businesses need to face the fact that the economy’s growth is going to be minimal at best …with the risk of another sharp downturn very real … and quit whining and go out and find a way to grow.

Businesses must not stop their quest for growth even in ‘bad times’ nor should they stop their quest under the guise that ‘well we were down .. but not really.’

Here is one thing I can promise you about growth companies.

In every case, there are a group of people (and I mean both business side people and advertising/marketing agency people) behind that company & brand that see things not just as they are, but as they could be.

And then they go out and get it.

No excuses.

So.

I guess I wrote this to warn people about people who stand up and say “we had a good year … we are not down as much as everyone else or the category.”

Down is never up.

And, by the way, up is attainable.

Even today.

facts and creation

January 23rd, 2012

“Without the hard little bits of marble which are called ‘facts’ or ‘data’ one cannot compose a mosaic; what matters, however, are not so much the individual bits, but the successive patterns into which you arrange them, then break them up and rearrange them.” - The Act of Creation

I find it tragic to watch bright, energetic youth become lethargic and uninspired in the workplace.

Yes. Tragic. Because it is such a waste of not only mindpower but, well, will power.  And it is also tragic to the work company because lethargy does not lead to ideas/ideation/creative thinking.

To me? The real problem lies with the older folk (in manager positions) who seem to lack a comprehensive relevant view of learning.  Or maybe better said … they have an archaic way of viewing the way it should be done.

There are a lot of leaders (management whatever you want to call them) who appear to be guilty of classifying learning as being a difficult and frustrating experience.

This is in combination with the fact they also tend to have odd views on ‘how to make it fun.’ Oh. And to complete that thought … they have a belief that they have to ‘make it fun’ because learning is difficult/frustrating. Therefore it is a flawed belief system.

Look.

Creative thinking and innovation does not arise out of a vacuum but must be supported by a culture that encourages people to experiment. To experiment with facts, with ideas and products. With the hard little bits of marble as it were.

Original thinking and new ideas has to be nurtured and rearranged in successive patterns … not destroyed and scattered.

We can all encourage creativity by helping young people learn to assess the bits of marble and take intellectual risks in their work & ideation. Does this have to be “made” fun? Nope.  And it is, frankly, silly to think it has to be.

Instead this is like providing a spark to combustible matter. I am not suggesting it should be painful but rather fun is slightly less relevant than providing the inspiration to learn and become engaged.

Ultimately I don’t believe management should teach people how to create ideas.

The goal should be to prepare young people to be competent and original in their thinking.

Do that and they will create mosaics like you have never seen before.

Oh.

And in successive patterns.

(by the way … that is a good thing)

hope, low prices & marketing (part 1)

August 22nd, 2011

ok.

Working in the marketing business I often find myself in some heated debates about whether advertising & marketing is “selling” (or it is often stated “oh, so you are in sales”).

Here is the answer.

It’s not sales. It may not even be selling (in the traditional sense).

Sure.

Ultimately marketing & advertising wants to “sell stuff” but the craft of communications itself is not about selling.

Or convincing.

Or persuading (in some weird and creepy way) someone to do something they don’t want to really do.

Is it about “persuading” in the sense I want someone to “choose me!” to be on their wallet team? Sure.

Is it about persuading someone through some trickery to buy or do something that is bad for them? Nope.

Because in the end It is really about attitudes (creating or aligning to a ‘truth’ – a real truth not a made up one) and behavior (understanding why someone does something they do and inserting a choice into their existing behavior … and sometimes modifying that behavior if you can truly offer something better for them as an alternative).

So marketing & advertising is really about informing so someone can make a choice – whatever is the best choice for them.

Therefore. Marketing & advertising is not in the selling business.

It is in the choice business.

And while choices have dollars & cents attached to them and features & benefits and all that truly functional crap … a person’s final choice preference is never any of those things.

A choice may be made based on them (that truly functional crap) but typically it is only made that way for lack of an alternative.

And that is why communicating “choice” is an art. Because communicating choice is about education and emotion and, well, hope.

Because the bottom line is that people want to make the choice that gives them the most hope.

Now.

That may sound hopelessly lofty but its not. In fact it is what marketing & advertsing & frankly just about any consumer business is all about.

We are in the hope business.

Hope of something (it doesn’t have to be some big audacious hope … sometimes it can just simply be some small glimmer of hope in an otherwise hopeless day).

Yes.

This is truth (and some businesses may cry & weep & gnash their teeth … I just wanted to type gnash).

People don’t really want cheaper prices.

People don’t really want better technology.

People don’t really want faster answers.

People don’t really want more time.

People don’t cooler features or more flashing widgets.

People even don’t really want more money at the end of the month.

None of that really matters to customers.

They want hope.

They want to know that they are going to be ok.

And they want to know that it can get better for themselves.

In a world where natural disasters wipe away lives in a second and leaders make decisions that take billions of dollars from hard working saving & investing people the only thing people can truly hold onto is a belief of something better.

Yet.

In our ROI-driven marketing world we not only seem content to pretend that a “faster, cheaper, better” is what people want but we also relentlessly pursue ineffective marketing communicatiosn initiatives expounding upon a litany of usefless features and functional doo-dads.

And we are wrong. Dead wrong.

People want hope.

In a lot of ways ‘the people’ are no different than you & I (because oddly enough we are people also).

They want to be listened to.

They don’t want to be lied to.

They don’t want you to talk over them.

They want you to validate their concerns.

They want their questions answered.

They don’t want you to ignore them.

They want you to inspire them.

They don’t want a sales pitch.

They don’t want you to be annoying.

They don’t want to hear about you.

They do want a distraction from real life.

They don’t want to be pressured.

They want to know that you have problems too.

They want a consistent partner.

They don’t want you to fake it.

They want truth in answers (the first time & every time).

They don’t want you to tell them what they want to hear.

They want to feel like you care.

They want you to hear what they aren’t saying.

And most importantly …

They want more than what they have (not materialistically but “happinesswise”)

They want more than what they expect (not just functionally but in life)

They want something better (not just functionally but in life)

They want optimism (based on truth not blarney).

So.

Enough of that.

People want hope.

(that is the common denominator in all the things I just typed)

And if you aren’t providing that in your marketing you … will …. not … be … successful.

Sure.

You can buy some sales and a “consumer relationship” with lowest prices & coupons and cool features and some functional widgetry but those people aren’t buying “you” they are buying the ‘feature of the day.”

In my words? You have bought a date not a relationship.

And you have missed an opportunity to be a hero. Instead you are a salesman.

You have missed an opportunity to have offered,and given, hope.

C’mon. be honest with yourself as you read this.

Think of all the times that were hoping that someone really cared about how bad you hurt inside. Or recognized the pain.

So ii guess if you really feel like you have to ‘sell’ … then sell hope.

Because as Hugh Macleod drew in his cartoon at the beginning of this post … if you can sell hope you can get someone to buy anything.

hope & marketing (part 2)

August 22nd, 2011

Ok. I had so much to write about in “hope, low process and selling” that I took this part and thinking and put it in its own lil post.

Here we go.

Fact.

Communicating choices with the intent to persuade someone to “choose me” is an inexact science.

In fact.

It is not a science at all (despite what ROI driven purchasing people suggest and desire).

Yes.

There is a discipline to crafting communications (c’mon … given the amount of time people have done things there is certainly a list of ‘trial & error’ learnings to use as benchmarks).

But.

Advertising iconic hero Bill Bernbach said: “I warn you against believing that advertising is a science. Artistry is what counts. The business is filled with great technicians, and unfortunately they talk the best game … but there’s one little problem. Advertising happens to be an art, not a science.”

And this dude, and his agency DDB, created some good shit (and still does).

So.

So, because being in the choice communication business (and selling hope) isn’t a science, the truth is (another fact) the more research conducted to “strengthen” choice communications (i.e., marketing & advertising) the more functional the communication has to be judged on … because that is the only thing research can quantitatively measure.

Emotion, or something you just feel in your gut, cannot be measured.

(note: there are some wacky research tools out there that attempt to do so but regardless of their best efforts no one I know can use ‘brain wave’ or ‘twitch muscle’ research to truly tell you what your gut tells you)

And (as noted in the previous ‘hope’ post) functional doesn’t win in the long run.  Emotion or some higher order value wins.

Bottom line?

Two things lead to mediocrity and conformity in communications: research and rational benefits.

Interestingly this thought goes way beyond communications and advertising.  It runs true in just about any transaction-based relationship (i.e., shopping).

Another fact.

Shopping isn’t simply a transaction. Shopping is an experience.

And I don’t necessarily mean experience in the “walking around and looking and touching” perspective. One expert said it best:

“We dream of shopping for beauty, truth and perfection, and if we do not shop for a perfect society, at least we shop for a perfect self.”

Yes.  Correct.  And, yes, again.

We shop and we make choices as an extension of ourselves – of who we are and what we want to be.  That, at its most psychological Maslow-like level, is the pursuit for a perfect self.

Sound like a bunch of mumbo jumbo? Maybe sounds like it but it ain’t.

We talk transactions but we behave emotionally.

(how often has your head say “he is all wrong for me” and then you go ahead and let your heart tell you what to do?)

Anyway.

The same expert also suggested that she believes “the noblest aspect of shopping is finding a community, a discovery that usually happens at a place like a farmer’s market or a neighborhood store, where interaction among customers is fostered. Rallying for these public spaces rather than buying things, she argues, should be what we use shopping to achieve.”

Poetic words.

Maybe even sounds a little too lofty.

But its not. Because if you ignore the thought behind the words you simply fall back into the functional/rational zone of sameness (and then, I guess, it does become a science).

If it helps … simplistically she is suggesting  creating spaces so that “birds of a feather can flock together” and be happy amongst others.

So why is all this important?

Well.  If I want someone to ‘choose me’ I have to understand the challenges.

Understanding motivation for behavior is one thing (and a very very important thing).

Understanding HOW to communicate is another.

Bill Bernbach again: “Eighty-five percent of all ads don’t even get looked at. Think of it! You and I are the most extravagant people in the world. Who else is spending billions of dollars and getting absolutely nothing in return? We were worried about whether or not the American public loves us. They don’t even hate us. They just ignore us.”

So even if I am in the ‘selling hope’ business I have to deliver the message in a memorable, interesting and artful way if I want whatever I am marketing to be chosen.

Notice I used art in there.

Because, once again, it is not a science.

I cannot simply say “hey, look over here, I am selling some hope-on-a-rope.”

I gotta be creative and offer up some communication that stirs someone emotionally and lets them arrive at the benefit all by themselves.  That is a powerful communications when that happens.

And there absolutely can be some discipline in the approach but the ultimate output is art.

A maddening art.  I often call it the “glorious mistakes when we blunder into an incredible way to say what we want to say.”

Why a ‘glorious mistake’?

Well.

Often the most insightful communication is partly flawed. Likeable.  Believable.

And I ended on believable because while communications is art … truth is just that – truth. No grey. Just truth.  And that is ultimately what makes things believable.

Bob Levenson (hired by Bill Bernbach) may have said it best when he responded to a Time magazine contest in the 1960′s. Ad agencies were invited to create an advertisement in the public interest. He wrote a manifesto for the ad industry (see below). It conveys the honesty that the advertising/marketing profession is founded upon.  And still should uphold as the beacon for everything every marketer (at any level) should do in the communications business.

Bottom line?

Share truth.

Sell hope.

And enjoy, share, and DO THIS OR DIE.

The Hurricane Checklist

August 10th, 2011

This is the Hurricane checklist (and Hurricane is a London brand content & social marketing agency)

Ok.

I was digging around for something (I cannot remember what) and I came across a marketing agency in London that has an awesome website with a bunch of well articulated thoughts.  I really liked their website because they permitted their people to just write and share their own point of view in their own voice.  Not many companies are confident enough to let that happen (they fear someone is going to say something crazy and some really important person is going to randomly come across it online and never ever ever want to speak with the company ever again … ever.)

So it is companies like this Hurricane group that give me hope companies can let an individual voice, of an employee, shout something from a hilltop without looking over their shoulder (and editing).

All that said.

These guys came up with an awesome 6 point checklist for developing campaign strategies that straddle traditional and “social” (see web based) marketing plans of action.

Kudos to these guys.  Smart.  Well articulated. Understandable.  Believable.

I would hire these guys.

Oh.

I work for an agency. Oops. Guess I can’t.

Here you go:

Trying to juggle the demands of integrating traditional media with digital/social media can be a nightmare. With the rules changing on a daily basis, what can you do to try and make sense of it all and still create great campaigns that deliver even greater returns?

Here at Hurricane we’ve been talking about our 6C’s checklist for several months now and the more we use it ourselves the more we swear by it. No seriously, hyperbola aside it’s effing awesome.

When looking at developing a campaign strategy for brand or lead generation activity, this checklist should form part of your campaign plan.

Here’s the low down.

1: Credibility – your primary motivation in the new world has to be customer NOT shareholder driven. You need to have a clear and authentic story as to why your product or  service “will make a difference” and not just line the pockets of investors and shareholders. What’s your story? Why is it authentic? Why should this matter to your audience?

2: Consent – just because you have a database of 10,000+ customers does not give you the right to spam them with emails and direct mail. You have to earn the right. This means focusing on understanding the needs of your customers first and taking a thought leadership stance to be able to engage rather than sell. What is your view of the market or category you play in? Can you create a thought leadership stance that goes against the accepted view of the market? Can you genuinely deliver against this position? Can you make it exciting and relevant?

3: Content – what can you create that will be of value to the unique buying tribe you are trying to engage with; whether its IT decision makers of  Financial directors. Make sure you nail your value proposition so that your content strategy has real focus. Then you need to think how you can inform, educate and entertain them. Aside from great data capture, great content moves people through the sales cycle quicker. I know you all know how important the right type of content is, but creating it in new and engaging ways (Audio, video…) and syndicating that content across paid for and social networks can really amplify your message and create positive interaction with your customers and prospects.

4: Communities – It’s more important than ever before to understand the unique buying tribes and communities where your brand or product has the strongest rational and emotional fit. These self gathering online communities wield huge influence and their networks and peers can help amplify any brand or marketing message. They are an active resource for all types of market insight and when motivated can be an excellent co-creation and crowdsourcing partner. You need to know where they are, what makes them tick, create content that creates a buzz and encourage them to participate and share in all aspects of your sales and marketing. Devoting yourself to these core communities is a sure fire way to create success.

5: Conversation – in the old world you would send out a rock solid piece of DM, follow it up with an email and back that up with a white paper. It was robust, logical and ticked all the boxes. However, in the new world you also have to be able to kick start the conversation. This means ultimately that you need to be interesting first and right and relevant second. Tapping into the socially connected world means giving people the ammunition to be part of the conversation. Nobody ever emailed their work colleagues a dull email about total cost of ownership. Always think about the BUZZ factor. How will this campaign get people talking about my product or service? What can you do to throw a curve ball into your market place that will get people talking? When you get this right, it’s what we call a Contagious Customer Experience!

6: Creativity – There is more clutter in our lives today than at any other point. To get through you have to make sure you have a stand out brand identity,  a meaningful set of beliefs and brilliant communications to bring it all to life. Social and alternative media have not replaced the big idea. The big idea is your highway straight into the mind of your customer. How does this creative idea make my brand stand out? How does this creative idea get people buzzed? How does this creative idea compel people to share it?

So there you have it, a checklist that quite simply could make you famous (honestly). Oops.

That last sentence (and the italics) are their words.

Interestingly they are words I have also used.

I cannot figure out of it is plagiarism if you think the same thought and use the same words and type them surrounding their thought (which you agree with).

Regardless.  I hope they don’t mind.

And remember … while this thinking may not make you famous (as they suggest) it will certainly insure you are smart.

interviewing for jobs: The Bruce 2.0 version

January 12th, 2010

I call this Interviewing 2.0 (it’s probably really version 2.11374 but let’s not quibble) because I am trying to get into the entire interviewing lingo that seems to be bombarding job seekers leading into the New Year. And I was hanging in there alright until I got to “10 ways to destroy your personal brand.” Oh boy. Let’s get started on my rant (although I will offer some advice). So. Before we get to actual interviewing let me get this off my chest about personal brand and branding:

Ok admit. The way people throw around the word brand nowadays drives me nuts. And the whole concept of building a “personal brand” is such a foreign wacko concept to me it is hard to wrap my head around. With all the stress that comes with unemployment and interviewing (and all the zillion perspectives of interview advice you can find online) trying to develop a personal brand seems like a crazy decision to make. When I hear ‘personal brand’ all I can think of is Ricky Henderson (i.e., speaking about yourself in the third person).

- A typical Ricky Henderson interview. Ricky when asked,

“Well, Ricky, he is the best base stealer of all time.”

“Ricky came to play tonight.”

“Ricky was seeing the ball well.”

Skip to your own interview. So tell me something about yourself. (you answering)

“The Bruce brand is an engaging brand and really good at…bla bla bla ”

(WTF).

I believe the minute you start referring to yourself as a brand (figuratively not literally…I assume no one would actually talk about their personal brand in an interview) you have lost it.

I buy the fact that the principles behind establishing a brand in the marketplace and establishing yourself to a company are similar, but in an interview you are a person (not a brand) talking with another person (who isn’t seeking to buy a brand but rather hire a person). But. Hey. If you want to be the best can of soup in the interview, more power to ya.

BUT. Remember. It may be semantics but there is no such thing as “building a brand.” You can build a great product or service. Deliver it consistently over time. Meet or exceed expectations. Do it consistently within a personally or character type. And, well, at some point people will award a brand status to the product/service. Remember. You do not claim a brand status. You are given, or earn, a brand status. So. I would argue if you are aiming to “build a personal brand” you run the risk of ignoring the underpinnings necessary because you are aiming for “becoming a brand” rather than a superior consistent functional delivery person.

Anyway. With all that said. So. Back to interviewing. During an economic downturn, people can be pulled every which way with job searching advice from someone holding up a Bible quoting ‘eternal advice’ (just a note: I don’t believe Moses was the first choice for that job) to, well, anyone who has had an interview and wants to hand out their version of job searching wisdom.

This “deep recession” (sorry to tell you but it’s a depression) creates some desperation and that makes people vulnerable. And that is a bad thing when you are interviewing. This is a time where people really need wise counsel and not superlative buzzword lingo which confuses people from simplicity.

So. My advice? Forget about building your own personal brand. Forget about all the wacky voodoo incantations that will win you the interview question challenge. Focus on simplicity (or your head will be filled with so much goo it may explode – which is embarrassing in an interview – and you won’t be able to coherently answer anything anyway).

Beyond all the interview coaching and seminars and such (which make my head spin so much I am not sure I would actually know what to do in an interview if I tried to follow all the coaching advice) interviewing comes down to two things:

- Functional competency (can you do the job)

- Chemistry (do you fit into culture and team…or…do we like you)

I would argue that if you nail these two things in an interview then things like salary and benefits and titles all fall into place. Completing a great interview process is similar to when you find something you cannot live without – you will pay full price and not wait for a promotion – you have to have it now. So if you go do your job in the interview process that is the prize (and oh by the way … keep that attitude throughout: “Buy me at full price, this is not a promotion” it is a healthy perspective for you to have regardless how badly you need a job).

Okay now. Remember. There are some things you can control and some things you cannot control in an interview (so don’t waste energy trying to control what you can’t is what I am trying to say):

What you can control:

  • What you are good at
  • Being yourself

What you cannot control:

  • Who they (the company) are culturally
  • What they are good at

So. I am going to actually start with Chemistry to get it out of the way (because Competency is the key to interviewing).

What I am getting at with ‘You can’t control their culture’ is you actually can’t control the chemistry factor. Just like eHarmony relationships, you can get a ‘match’ but when you meet “it’s” either there or it ain’t (you know … the elusive “it” whatever it is that makes chemistry click). You may wish for a relationship to bud but you cannot fake it or make it. However, you can control who you are so they (and you) can judge whether you are a good fit for them.

“Be true to thineself.”

Shakespeare

Bottom line is if they like you (or like the idea of you being part of their team) you are in the game. They won’t choose you solely on this but chemistry is valuable particularly in this day and age of lean company structure. So be yourself. Don’t try to be anything else <not even your personal brand>.

Sure. There are some cosmetic things you can be flexible with. They all wear ties and you hate wearing ties. Unless that is a deal breaker to you wear a tie and shut up about it (when you interview AND if you get the job).

Last thought on ‘Be true to thineself.’ If you try and act one way to get the job and then you get the job one of two things happen:

  1. You revert to yourself at some point and they get confused and probably unhappy (and want to break up at some point), or
  2. You try to act that way all the time and are pretty unhappy every morning you wake up to go to work.

Chemistry in this case ain’t created. It either is or it isn’t. And the only way you can be sure is if you just be yourself. Don’t worry. Most companies aren’t seeking clones so they aren’t expecting you to act like them. Just that you fit in their culture and there is some chemistry (and chemistry takes an even higher priority these days because everyone runs so lean things can get a little stressful on occasion).

So. Let’s talk competence.

Here is where I disagree with many of the wise interview experts. I hear sell sell sell. Make sure you show results. Bla bla bla. Yeah. Sure. But here’s the deal: Stay within yourself and your personality. If you don’t like talking about results because you feel uncomfortable about it, don’t. Trust me. If you feel uncomfortable talking about ‘results you have generated’ it will show. And who knows. Maybe their culture is one of humbleness. Anyway. The whole “quantify what you have done” rule kind of throws me a little.

And let’s be serious. If you interview for a sales position you talk all that sales gobbledygook. If you interview for an engineering slot you bring the calculator and show the whizz-bang co-tangent of a molecule. If you are interviewing for a mechanic position then know how to change brakes. And if you are an accountant, bring a green visor and abacus. You pretty much know the gig on your competency.

And competency. However you define it comes down to “Can you do the job they are interviewing you for?”

I personally don’t care how you prove that. Show results? Sure. Track record of successes? OK. Talk your way through your process to get things done? Sure. Just pick a way that feels comfortable for you. Because if you do then you are aligned with your own chemistry <and thineself> and your answer will be comfortable and not some made up mumbo jumbo.

And, frankly, if you can’t show you are competent in the role then chemistry doesn’t matter. But I also have to tell you … most people who are interviewing for a particular job are revealed in the first five minutes of an interview whether they are at least in the competency range of adequacy or not. You can’t prepare for questions or bone up on things (although I am all for doing homework on job and company before going into an interview) to showcase competency … because … well … you are either competent or not.

Here is a thought. Competency means you know the vocabulary and you talk it well enough that an outsider doesn’t understand a frickin thing if they eavesdrop on one of your in depth conversations <at least that’s my criteria for you knowing your stuff>.

But, oh, by the way. It should be you talking and discussing (and if you are passionate about something go ahead and be passionate). Don’t try and bring out the latest marketing fad (or suggest that something isn’t part of your personal brand DNA. Ouch).

Ok. Someone is going to start jabbing at me on preparing for interview questions. Look. The questions you receive are typically a reflection of their culture. You may get thrown a curve ball but you cannot go wrong if you stick with “competency.”

They have a job open. They have a functional need. Tell them how you can meet that need completely.

I swear to you. If you stick with functional competency as fall back you won’t go wrong (please note the word ‘fallback’). What I mean.

Specific questions you answer specifically. Unfortunately that means “listen” and then “respond” <yeah … you actually have to listen to the question … oh … and feel free and ask for clarification if you aren’t sure>.

Vague questions (like “tell me about yourself” or “what are you like in the office” or stuff like that). Competency. Fall back on answers centered around delivering on the functional need of the role you are interviewing for. If they want a “fuzzy feel good” answer they will ask you that question (hint: “I know you can do the job but I want to get a feel for what you are like”). By the way. Even feel good answers revolving around competency ain’t bad like “Well. I am pleased you believe I can do the job. That is actually a reflection of what I am like. Performance or doing the job well is important to me.” Then go ahead and bla bla bla about yourself.

Next. I am gonna get jabbed on “competent means average”. Baloney. Get in the game first. Superlatives are dangerous. Being “exceptional” is a very dangerous game. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be confident you can fulfill the role they have outlined. Pound away on consistently capable of delivering on functional need of the role you are interviewing for <see … this isn’t about building your brand … this is nuts and bolts stuff>.

It’s possible I have simplified this too much but I don’t think so. In times of stress I have found simplicity is the way to go (and interviewing is stressful). That said I imagine my biggest issue with all this online advice is that while I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer I have interviewed hundreds of people as a manager and interviewed for jobs myself a number of times and even I get confused on what to prepare, how to prepare, what to say, what not to say and how to act.

So. In the end I aim for simplicity:

- Be prepared.

- Be yourself.

- Be competent for what they need done.

Anything beyond that and I am not sure what good it does. Oh. Maybe that’s the stuff that builds your personal brand.

Marketing in a Recession (Part 1): you can’t hide from recession

January 7th, 2010

Note:  This is the first of a two-part piece that I wrote early last year for my agency and clients about marketing in a recession.  Look for part 2 in the coming days.

The current environment is one that cannot be ignored. We are in a recession. People, businesses and consumers, have less discretionary money. Businesses will be cutting back on expenses and marketing departments will have to do more with less. This means that business goals will still be there and more challenging to meet and Marketing departments will have to do it with less money. This white paper outlines some thoughts on how marketers can be a little smarter with their money to position themselves to be successful in the marketplace.

Let’s begin by talking about what is happening in the marketplace. And why maybe some of the past recession rules may not apply moving forward in 2009.

Comparing the 2008-2009 recession to past recessions

This generation hasn’t faced this scenario before. In fact, not many adults who dealt with this scenario in the 1930’s remain (to maybe guide us). Yes. I am suggesting we cannot compare recent recession learning and need to go back to the Great Depression for learning.

In a traditional recession people are worried about losing jobs as companies cut back to face the economic challenges. In the current scenario the entire financial infrastructure seems to be breaking down – globally. Boy, that sounds like the Depression era doesn’t it? Entire companies, brands as they may be, which have been in existence through generations are crumbling. Icons of stability are not only looking less stable they are ceasing to exist.

The difference between now and recent recession periods in the consumer’s mind can be summarized – “I am worried about losing my job versus even if I do all of these things right and keep my job can I still make it.” Don’t be surprised when people shift into a full survival mode. And not just low and middle income people but even large wealth groups.

In this kind of environment it may seem silly to talk about marketing or protecting your brand. But these topics are relevant to business success and the economy in general. The economy machine will continue to run on strong functional products and services being marketed to people. ‘Fluff’ products and services-products and services surviving more on image than performance and ‘fluff’ marketing-will not survive.

Discretionary versus non-discretionary category marketing

The marketing rules of the game are going to vary between discretionary and non-discretionary categories. People will treat marketing messages for “items I need” and “items I want” with a different scorecard.

Discretionary categories, like soda, cigarettes, candy, movies, etc., will certainly be able to get away with traditional image driven campaigns. In fact, historical evidence suggests that lower cost discretionary items will prosper in difficult economic times (according to annualized increases in consumer spending in the UK 1989-91 movie revenue grew 16%, alcohol 10%, and sports & toys 6% – source: DDB “capturing opportunities in challenging times.”).

Bottom line is that in uncertain times people will still be seeking moments of indulgence or escapism. They will just be more thoughtful and low cost indulgent moments will prosper.

It is in non-discretionary-like categories where things will get challenging. Branding campaigns, soft image driven look & feel, in non-discretionary categories will be bad. Very bad. They will be seen as the actions of uncaring, “fat” companies. (see recent example of automotive CEO’s flying first class to Washington DC meeting). Campaigns need not be pedantic but they should err on the side of being more overt in their messaging of benefits and value. Companies messaging and spending cannot be perceived as wasteful but useful, not pandering but compassionate and not imagery but rather benefit-driven.

Enlightened Conflict