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.

Note: Read Running a Business Part 1 here.

The biggest failing I have seen in businesses throughout my career is lack of alignment within an organization.

Let me explain what I mean by alignment.

Alignment is that everybody understands functionally what the organization absolutely must deliver day in and day out.

And it is nice if they understand the “why” (the vision), but the functional aspect is the core to alignment. Understanding of this can help all levels prioritize what is right and what is wrong. It also insures externally people never get confused.

I sometimes refer to alignment as “purposeful fragmentation.” Alignment permits the parts of the organization (departments, divisions, etc.) to maintain some autonomy yet always be grounded in what is ultimately important to the organization.

Typical problems for alignment:

The Pendulum.

The more the leader is unfocused (and unfocused can simply mean lack of consistency) the larger the swing with on-the-ground employees. A swinging organization is one that is wasting energy in trying to meet shifting objectives. Even worse in a pendulum situation the leader, because the transgressions are so minor in his or her eyes, often doesn’t recognize the repercussions of his or her actions (and blames the organization).

The Crack.

A crack in agreement in upper leadership becomes crevasses by the time it reaches individual departments. Maybe the executive leadership team is split on vision and what is important. It may be a minor disagreement. It may be only one or two of the 12 person executive team.

In the end it creates inefficient crevasses in the organization where individual groups “do their own thing.”

The Marbles

It may be the leader is talking with marbles in his/her mouth and no one understands but I don’t call it the marbles because of that.

The leader is unclear. Maybe they are so aspirational no one is clear what they are supposed to do. Maybe they are clear but no one understands. Maybe they are perfectly clear but unfocused. Regardless. The organization becomes like marbles dumped on a table. Everyone rolling every which way in whatever direction their particular lay of the land dictates the way to go.

Anyway, eventually they all do roll off the table and the leader has lost his marbles (Sorry. Couldn’t resist).

The Exception

The leader suggests the situation dictates an exception. Regardless of the reason for the exception the organization doesn’t remember the reason…they only remember the exception. And one reasonable exception begets another reasonable exception in their minds.

So.

What can an organization do to get aligned?

Bookending for alignment.

I like a bookend strategy to gain alignment. What this means is great leaders are clear on vision (words and consistent actions) and have on-the-ground employee understanding. Get those two things straight and inevitably all the books between the bookends will all make sense.

In a bookend strategy the Middle Management’s job is easier because instead of directing up/down they are managing what they are receiving from the top and underneath. In terms of percentages, this means that the leader can be 75% vision and 25% functional/tactical and the on-the-ground organization can be 25% vision and 75% (or even more) functional/tactical. It represents a good mix but aligned on commonalities.

Finally.

The key to alignment is isolating the organization’s Core Competency.

Now.

There are many business consultants who do not agree with me on this issue.  I believe core competency is the single most important aspect in an organizational alignment. Yes. Even more so than vision <although purpose could be very very close behind>.

To me … I believe you begin by stripping away all the emotional aspects and outline in a succinct way what the company/brand delivers from a functional aspect the best, i.e., what is it they are best at.

This core competency should be stated as a specific superiority claim of distinction or a distinct focused statement at what the company functionally does best.

Many people talk about “isolating the vision or the purpose.” Frankly, if the core competency doesn’t support whatever vision is stated, it is all going to fall apart so you may as well start with what the organization delivers day to day functionally.

The core competency needs to be supported with “reasons to believe”:

The reason to believe for the core competency should be focused.

Does it have a special ingredient?

Is there a pre-emptive endorsement (more NASCAR chief mechanics recommend, more doctors recommend, etc)?

Has research shown proof (Volvo crash demonstration)?

The preference is to have one focused reason to believe, but often a company needs to “bundle” distinct areas of expertise (tastes great, less filling or brighter teeth, fresher breath) to deliver proof of performance.

Whatever is decided as the reason to believe it becomes the unassailable mantra throughout the organization from management, innovation, product development, sales, marketing, finance strategy and service.

Ultimately alignment has several dimensions – physical, emotional and intellectual understanding throughout all levels of the organization (leader to the most junior on-the-ground employee). It ends up being a fine line between alignment and purposeful fragmentation, but one worth walking.

This is a REALLY long post but there are REALLY too many bowl games, and I ain’t gonna short change one. I am going to make the call on every one. I promise no in-depth analysis and in fact I let my border collie select a couple where dog mascots were involved.

College football is awesome despite the 94 bowl games.

I love college football. College basketball just has so many damn games it’s hard to know what is really important until NCAA tournament time. And pro sports are just so passionless and teamless to me. This season started out gangbusters with all those supposed top ten teams getting kicked around every weekend. Every weekend seemed to have at least one great game. Having TCU and Cincinnati going undefeated as well as each of them going out and beating some non-conference, pretty high profile teams was awesome.

So. Let’s go bowling. here are my warped view predictions for all 94 (really 34) bowl games (note: because some games are complete they are easier to predict):

New Mexico Bowl: Wyoming vs. Fresno State
It is the day of the Cowboys. Saints go down to the ‘Boys. Bulldogs wrassled to ground by Cowboys. Wyoming is so happy to be out of Wyoming they drag the game out as long as they can (unfortunately for them only two overtimes). I am not sure anyone watched the game.

St. Petersburg Bowl: Rutgers vs. Central Florida
The Scarlet Knights had to win because they were playing a religious defender role of St. Petersburg – the patron saint of blue hairs. The seniors across the United States rejoice with a Rutgers win but bemoan the cut back of Medicare in the Senate. Fair trade off for all who can remember what the trade off was in the beginning.

New Orleans Bowl: Southern Miss vs. Middle Tennessee

(Editor’s note: This prediction was written on Monday, before Middle Tenn. beat Southern Miss. 42-32.) This game is being played tonight…but…Brett Favre played at Southern Miss. Oh. And Middle Tennessee are the Blue Balls…oops…I mean Blue Raiders…huh? Southern Mississippi easy. But. Regardless. There are too many vowels in this bowl game.

Las Vegas Bowl: Brigham Young vs. Oregon State (8:00 pm EST Tue Dec 22, 2009)
Cougars versus Beavers. C’mon. No brainer. But, uh oh. Mormons visit Sin City. This looked like an easy pick judging by mascots but Oregon State recruits some “professional escorts” to be cheerleaders, BYU is significantly distracted (and actually pick out several second and third wives during the game) and the Beavers damn BYU to a loss.

Poinsettia Bowl: Utah vs. California (8:00 pm EST Wed Dec 23, 2009)
Cal attended the class that reminded them eating Poinsettias is poisonous. That gets them off on the right foot at the pregame banquet. But then the actual game arrives. Utes have arrows. Bears get shot by arrows. Bears become pincushion for Utes’ target practice and become rug in main lobby of Poinsettia headquarters.

Hawaii Bowl: SMU vs. Nevada (8:00 pm EST Thu Dec 24, 2009)
Both teams drive the road to Hilo, get stoned out of their minds on some great Hawaii grass, start wearing hula skirts and drive the trainers crazy during the game with their ongoing munchies. Mustangs cannot keep their noses out of the feedbag all game long and Nevada shakes off the grass skirts long enough to run into the end zone more than SMU to pull off the Ganja Bowl win.

Little Caesars Pizza Bowl: Ohio vs. Marshall (1:00 pm EST Sat Dec 26, 2009)
OMG. Who cares? Pizza pizza. That’s all I can say. There will be a Thundering Herd toward the closest Little Caesars after the game so they can have extra pepperoni to take the sting off of losing to a team called Ohio without State after it.

Meineke Bowl: North Carolina vs. Pittsburgh (4:30 pm EST Sat Dec 26, 2009)
C’mon. This is a no brainer. The winner gets free mufflers. North Carolina has horse & buggies. Pennsylvania makes cars. And. Pittsburgh can melt them down and rejuvenate the city economy. Oh. And let me remind everyone if Pitt had won their game against Cincinnati they would be in a BCS game. How far the Cats have fallen. But the mufflers prove motivation to drive to victory.

The Original Fearless Leader

I have always believed people in business are at their best when they are fearless.

And I believe looking back I have always tried to manage my staff and businesses by encouraging fearlessness.

What do I mean by fearlessness?

Do what’s right.

Say what’s right.

Don’t worry, you won’t lose your job.

Don’t worry, you won’t lose the business.

Sure.

Sometimes this attitude can put everyone on the team in a tough spot (but that’s kinda why someone like me gets paid the big bucks to protect them). But the alternative is employees running scared and looking over their shoulders.

And today it seems most employees are running scared.

I fear we have companies running scared when of all times we need to be fearless.

It is not difficult to understand given the current economy.

But I believe being scared is something managers and companies should be focused on now. To me this is a time when we should be encouraging employees to be looking forward, fearlessly seeking the right path for success and opportunities. Not only will it make your company stand out but I also believe it is the key to getting the economy back on track (Ok … one of the keys).

Employees running scared are investing wasted energy in worrying.

Employees running scared invest energy in non-business related things (cruising job sites & networking).

Employees running scared cannot be happy (and happiness is a completely underrated characteristic of productivity).

Of course not all employees have that DNA (and American business culture doesn’t necessarily encourage “do the same job great without seeking promotion”). And I am not proposing you can get an entire organization in this mindset (or you want to). You will always have the “I am going to do my job and whatever makes my boss and people happy” staff. And that’s cool. All organizations need a mix. You always need that core of people who just get the shit done.

But I would argue even these people would perform better if they weren’t running scared.

Creating the shift.

The challenge today is to get more employees to be fearless. Notice I didn’t say “safe.” Safe is defensive. Fearless is offensive in tone. By making that point I am also pointing out how huge an effort something like this will take today.

Getting people from safe to fearless is about creating energy.

Getting people from scared to fearless is about reversing energy.

It all starts at the top.

The upper management needs to walk the walk.

But it doesn’t end there because middle management has to buy in, and live it and not just say it. It won’t happen overnight and it won’t happen with everyone.

The key is to create a backbone of attitude throughout the organization that will steady everyone when there are moments of “digression” (which will happen).

Good luck.

Be fearless.

===

“There are countless ways of achieving greatness, but any road to achieving one’s maximum potential must be built on a bedrock of respect for the individual, a commitment to excellence, and a rejection of mediocrity.”

–

Buck Rodgers

===========

Here is a truth: Doing great things takes work.

Yup.

No matter how easy the great make it look <whatever “it” is> … “it” takes focus … some attitude <okay .. a lot of attitude> and a commitment to getting the shit kicked out of you along the way.

Sorry about that folks but, yes, a commitment to getting the shit kicked out of you.

Greatness is not a smooth road.

Because unfortunately greatness isn’t really a balanced relationship. What I mean by that is that along the way … the really great people truly show respect for all and everyone. But, yet, other people get to play by other rules <i.e., others don’t have to show respect for other individuals>.

Yes.

It sucks.

Not everyone plays by the same rules let alone the rules themselves.

But sometimes the rocky road is far more interesting and rewarding in the end.

And often, it seems, the rocky road is the high road.

Simply … greatness is achieved by winning the right way despite the fact others play the wrong way.

Here we go.

How often does a consultant come in and force you to sit down and answer the infamous question “so what makes you unique?”

<answer: every frickin’ time>

Oh, how I get tired of this unique or ‘how are you different?’ discussion.

If you have been there, you have seen these conversations go round and round dancing on the head of a pin.

Invariably you land on one meaningless thing (to the majority of the world if not the majority of your own employees) or you have a laundry list that the consultant writes on a board and says “okay. Great day. You need to figure out which of these is most important to you.”

Note to self:

“gee. thanks. what makes you think we can resolve that 48 hours from now if we cannot now?”

I believe distinctness is the key not uniqueness.

Am I suggesting avoiding true product or service differentiation? Heck no.

Go for it.

I am simply arguing that it is next to impossible in today’s environment to have one. Ok. A sustainable one. I believe the cellular category right now has been doing a pretty good job of highlighting “unique” features (and sometimes benefits). But most of them are short term and not sustainable (and they have lots of money to make short term look big).

In service categories sustainable “uniqueness” is … well … pretty much impossible. Unique is very subjective here.

Thinking customer first or “we care” is certainly not unique nor different. That characteristic may represent something the company cares a lot about but most companies to one degree or another feature that characteristic.

In the end that means we are often talking about small degrees of separation which makes it difficult to discern the difference to the majority. And the amount of energy we expend trying to justify and explain that this incredibly small difference translates into a significantly larger benefit just isn’t worth the return on that investment (because that small degree of separation is lost to a competitor responder or thru consumer confusion on internet).

Now.

What is sustainable? Character and personality.

That is certainly distinct.

Could it end up looking close to someone else? Maybe (but I would argue 90% of the time the other guy will blink and do something that will make people question their character).

Brand personality/character differentiation topic is another writing of mine.

This one is just a rant on uniqueness.

=======

“Never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Napoleon Bonaparte

========

Well.

This quote always reminds me of patience. I have always liked this quote.

So often we are in a rush to “do something” where patience is called for.

Napoleon’s strategies have been examined and torn apart by more expert analysis than I would be capable of doing, but I would say two things.

1. In general he selected great commanders of his armies and delegated initiative to respond.

2. His strength as a general was not in planning but responding. He put himself in situations. Waited. And responded. And won often.

This quote reminds me of patience and delegation.

—————

There is a tide in the affairs of men
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures. (IV.ii.269–276)

William Shakespeare

========

I am not a big classic literature guy. I struggle to slog my way through things like the works of Shakespeare. But I truly appreciate the well articulated sound bite whenever it is written.

I love this one.

To me, it is a reminder that opportunities in life are fleeting, but there are many if you pay attention.

It is nice to remind yourself there are many opportunities ebbing and flowing in front of us (because then you stop dwelling on regrets). And  I am not just opportunities to succeed or do things … but also to laugh and love and live. We should seek these tides and enjoy them rather than simply float aimlessly on some ocean of time.

Of course.

Some literary expert will probably tell me I completely missed the point. But. This is my website. And my thought on the quote.

==

“Stop discussing how serious the problem is, and get serious about finding an immediate solution to it.”

—–

Terry Mark

Ok.

This is a business lesson from September 14^th 1812.

…………. burning of Moscow …….

.

The beginning of the lesson?

On September 14^th 1812, the Russians set fire to Moscow in the face of Napoleon Bonaparte’s troops.

Yup.

The governor of Moscow herded out most of the Moscow residents and burned almost 80% of the city.

Just as a reminder to all non-historians…this began the demise of Napoleon’s reign. This action not only permitted Russia to defeat Napoleon by forcing a debilitating retreat back to France, but it also began the demise of the Grand Armee of France.

The point of this is… well … how far would you go to solve your business problem?

What happened on this date should make us all think about what we in the business world would sacrifice to win.

Look.

Do you imagine there was consensus in this Moscow discussion & decision?

Okay.

So.

Can you imagine the first guy who stood up and said “hey, I have an idea, how about we purposely burn Moscow so they can’t have it?” (of course all said in Russian, probably after several liters of vodka, to the Czar and probably a couple of Cossack bodyguards … who have some very sharp swords)

Someone had some kahones. And I hesitate to believe many people in today’s business world have that type of kahones.

The tough decisions are … well … tough. And they are even tougher when your survival is at stake.

So would you be willing to burn your burn your business to win in the face of overwhelming odds?

Ok.

What ARE you willing to do to win?

Heck.

Maybe most importantly.

When you look at your situation do you even recognize how desperate your situation is?

<remember … someone in Russia recognized, and had the balls to say something about, the fact they were about to get their ass kicked>

The business landscape is strewn with the wreckage of businesses that did not envision their own demise.

Next.

Someone “stepped out of the box” with a solution. Ok. They actually stepped ‘into the box’ and said … “let’s destroy the box.’

And let’s be clear.

I have to imagine neither of these points, as stated above, were popular, well-received nor accepted as a “so what do we do” type of moment.

Anyway.

One of the most difficult things a company can do is address their situation in the market.

In general I believe most companies and businesses are pretty good at assessing their situation in the marketplace. I, for one, have been in a number of those types of meetings where everyone sits down and honestly assesses the difficult position they are in.

I also have been through too many meetings where that same business just isn’t willing to do what it takes to resolve the situation.

Hey.

I am not suggesting this is an easy discussion (but at least we don’t have Cossacks with really sharp swords standing around us while we are discussing what to do).

So.

Are you willing to put 80% of everything you have up in flames to win?

I guess it depends on whether you believe the situation merits it. And that is a toughie for sure because we are certainly a country and group of optimists and in general we always believe there is a positive horizon. And burning ‘the city’ isn’t necessary.

But.

What if it is?

Would you recognize it?

Would someone in your group recognize it?

Oh.

And if someone did would you listen?

Look.

I don’t have the answers. And I am not suggesting every situation demands “burning the city.”

But.

This date in history reminds us that sometimes extreme situations demand extreme solutions.

In the end?

Keep your eyes open. And keep your mind open to solutions.

Sometimes the extreme solution, while scary, is the right solution.

I recently had a couple of conversation where I was being asked a lot of questions about new business, positioning a company and all that sort of stuff. Of course that type of conversation wanders thru strategic strength, criteria of ‘what you want’ (call the criteria fun, fame, and fortune) and how to grow a business smartly (and a half dozen other topics).

In both cases they were pleased with the conversation and asked if I had a process they could use to help guide the people around them in this discussion.

Whew.

Bring up one of my pet soapboxes.

Well.

Having worked my way thru these issues at least a hundred times … yes … I have a process. In fact I probably have 5 or 6 effective processes. Okay. I probably have a thread of questions that probably need to be answered to effectively reach a conclusion.

Suffice it to say most situations relate to a continuum of “who am I now, where am I now, where do I want to be, how do I want to be seen in the end.” I have seen consultants and positioning experts apply a variety of words and “voodoo” process systems to attack these same questions over and over again.

To me it’s kind of silly to have one process to attack this. Especially if you believe the solution resides within the company itself (or whomever is asking the questions) rather than the answer residing within the consultant (because the answer never is there by the way).

The “process” is typically dictated by the problem that needs to be solved and the personality of who has the issue that needs to be resolved. I will be honest. I don’t really give a shit about my process. I just care about what trick (or tool that inspires the response necessary to get the conversation moving if you feel better worded that way) I have up my sleeve at the moment that will get the person who has the issue to be able to state their problem in a way that they kind of see the solution themselves. Is that process driven? Heck I don’t know. I doubt I do exactly the same every time. And I sure won’t shove “my process” down someone’s throat if it slows us down from finding a solution.

Timing? In general I think week long consulting gigs are nuts. I think if you get the right people in a room and stimulate the right conversation if a consultant can’t isolate the issue in one day he/she isn’t worth a shit as a facilitator or “consultant”. It isn’t some type of voodoo. There aren’t but so many solution vectors available. And most people who look at their problems when you force them to truly strip things down can see the core issue (heck. They are typically smart folk. Sometimes they just get caught up in the fog of politics and random important unimportant things they have to think about.

One day.

One room.

The right people.

You should get close to the core issue and solutions.

Consultants also drive me a little nuts. Especially how they get paid.

Here is the deal in my eyes.

Initially pay me for my time and the effort I put into it. Cover my expenses. That is it. If the consultant sucks that is all you pay. And that is all the consultant deserves. Even if the consultant in their brilliance believes they have given you brilliance (and you just weren’t brilliant enough to see it) they shouldn’t be rewarded for that. They just weren’t good enough for you to see the brilliance. Don’t pay them anymore then their time and initial effort.

Okay.

You were happy. Thought there was value. You felt it was time well spent. You may have even found a solution (by the way. No matter what you are told you may not walk out with a usable solution.) Or for a variety of reasons you may get close to “the answer” but just cannot implement it or whatever. But. SEEING the solution was worth it. Pay some more.

Last.

You thought it was worthwhile AND you found a usable solution. Pay more. The consultant earned it.

Paying more by getting help implementing.

Well, sometimes a consultant can earn more by helping you implement the solution. I believe the lure of money can make people do some things they just may not want to be involved in.

Sometimes it is good to part company and to walk away then. Implementation can use some outside guidance but I kind of believe you will either get it done as an organization or you won’t. Sure. There are some tricks that can help gain embracing of an idea but bottom line is it takes management fortitude to win the day not organizational alignment tricks (tools).

Sometimes great consultants are like “hit men.”

Their strength is focus and solution for the issue. And I admit I also like to offer up a couple of methods to implement a solution (usually right when the solution is discussed). But I am probably better served walking away and maybe coming back in a year and talking with the same group about “the solution” and how it is going.

In other words continue to maximize the strength of “stepping in, assessing, and offering a solution.”

But, hey, that’s my opinion.

Communicating meaningful information so people can make meaningful choices.

Let’s talk about the definition of ‘Marketing.’

It isn’t sales.

It isn’t some psychological mumbo jumbo of convincing people to do something they don’t want to do.

It IS about attitudes & behavior. That means … at its heart marketing should be about education.

And similar to our school systems I believe marketers have a similar responsibility as teachers … a responsible transfer of information.

Okay.

That doesn’t mean, as a marketer, I have to always facilitate a debate on the positives of social democracy versus socialism in the marketplace with regard to adult diapers but it does mean marketers have a responsibility to speak the truth. Not nuances of the truth (or selective lying … or selective or partial truths).

So, in the end, I tend to believe marketing’s struggle will always reside within individuals’ definition of “meaningful information.”

And we shouldn’t be naïve enough to believe that even if everyone agrees with this definition that everyone will “get it right.”

In some cases people will make true mistakes based on “I think it should be ‘this’ versus you think it should be ‘this’.” <note: because whether we want to admit it or not … people in marketing are … well … people .. and not all people think exactly the same way … sorry about that>

On other occasions, someone will decide to try and communicate something unimportant and try to make it important (shame on you).

The largest error in our ways will be reflected in what I see is the biggest flaw in the marketers’ world.

The fact that most marketers delude themselves into shaping something <product or service … or worse … a ‘brand’> as unique when it is simply well crafted information (and not unique).

Regardless.

I believe marketing is ultimately about truth.

Maybe I am naïve but I believe common sense and honesty always ends up winning. False “uniqueness” is uncovered as emperors’ clothes in the end … so why not stake truth out, meaningful information, for all to see and let people make meaningful choices?

You are gonna have to do it anyway <because consumers are pretty smart people>.

In other words, educate people and they will judge what you say, your product,your company, your brand with an unjaded eye.

The potential prize? Maybe, just maybe, they will actually choose what you are offering for all the right reasons.

So.

All that said. Here is a surprising definition (that is if you have done the math and uncovered the formula) … the definition of Marketing is … well … truth.