If you're even remotely associated with the marketing profession you've sat in a meeting in the last 24 months where someone suggested an idea based on "random acts of kindness." Like ...
Let's hand out candy canes to people in front of Grand Central.
Let's leave $10 gift cards in New York City taxis.
I'm just as guilty as the next person. No judgement here. But it got me thinking.
Yesterday I Tweeted that Small and harmless acts of subversion are good for the soul.
Is there a brand that could own this? What would it look like? Could it be pulled off in a tounge-in-cheek way so to amuse but not anger?
Like what if CB2 gave a 10% discount on office furniture to anyone who showed a picture of them sitting in their boss' chair; 20% if your feet are on the desk?
Or what if a hat company gave a discount to anyone who tweeted a picture of themselves performing a photo-bomb (wearing the hat, of course)?
Some stream-of-consciousness thinking before the sun comes up today.
I haven't given all that much thought to crowdsourcing, which may be odd given my line of work.
I haven't given all that much thought to Louis CK, which may be odd given my age and comedic sensibility.
I was listening to Louis CK on Bill Simmons' most excellent podcast, and without meaning to they touched on an interesting point about the wisdom of the many versus the wisdom of the few.
As I understand it, Louis has a very successful show on FX. What's interesting about it is that the network has zero control over it. They wire him $200K per episode, and from that he creates the entire thing (including taking out his salary).
This autonomy is very rare. It's also a relatively paltry sum for an actor as successful as Louis.
But the show is hit, and growing an audience with every episode.
So why is it working?
Louis' position is this (paraphrasing):
The more people involved in making decisions (particularly creative ones) the more watered down an idea gets. In essence, consensus-building breeds mediocrity.
By the time Bob from legal, Mary from finance, John from ad sales and Lisa from PR have all given their input, the essence of the idea is lost. And this is nothing against Bob, Mary, John and Lisa - I'm sure they are good at what they do. But they are not comedians.
So you've hired an incredibly successful creative (in this case Louis) for his talent but essentially said to him, "we only trust your sensibility to a certain point."
The disconnect is that by the time Bob, Mary, John and Lisa have stamped the idea, it's not Louis' sensibility any more. So why hire him in the first place?
Bringing it back to my world, I do have to wonder out loud: Is the wisdom of the crowd all that wise, or is the real value that it make us (me, you, brands, agencies) feel safer about any given decision simply because it's based on consensus? And as a result, are we breeding mediocrity? What constitutes authority on any given topic - deep knowledge, a proven track record and passion? Or simply a point-of-view, no matter how uniformed or unformed, and an Internet connection?
I genuinely don't know.
But I think of some of the great creative and marketing talents of our time, and how they would view the wisdom of the crowd. Three immediately come to mind. Clive Davis - he didn't do any market research before signing a scrawny young singer who eventually became Whitney Houston. Steve Jobs once famously said, "It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." And finally, Alex Bogusky (always a polarizing character) - Crispin is (in)famous for retaining creative control over their clients' work. And love or hate the agency, you can't deny they've had a pretty killer run.
I was talking to my newest colleague (and likeminded thinker) Alan Kercinik the other day about the missed communications opportunities between when new products are announced and they are actually available for purchase.
I call it the Conversation Chasm. And yes, I'm sure I'm not the first person to use the phrase.
Just thinking out loud over morning coffee ...
In my own very crude way, I tried to chart it out below.
The X axis is time:
Pre-sell: Where very early meetings take place between manufacturer and retailer. Usually a dark period for manufacturer due to competitive fears.
Launch: A moment in time. A press conference. A stunt. A trade show. Hope is to make a big splash with buyers, media and consumers.
Road to sales: More sell-in to retail, but not much focus on the consumer if we're being honest. All the big $ is chambered for ...
Sales start: Another big splash moment. Where media kicks in and everyone tries to out-scream the competition.
Sell-through: Focused on getting products off the shelves.
The Y axis is marcom effectiveness. I haven't given much thought to what that means for the purposes of this post. But essentially it's just how well you are doing against your goals. UPDATE: After thinking more about it, the Y axis should be "Conversations."
The purple line represents the way many industries - consumer electronics jumps to mind - approach things. Big launch splash - timing usually pegged to an industry trade show or a reaction to a competitor. This activity is usually led by communications. Followed by a pretty dark period where the marketing folks ready the campaign. Then sales start - boom! And finally, sell-through which normally falls to shopper marketing teams.
The green line is a more optimal way of approaching it. The big difference being the relative plateau (rather than huge valley) between the launch moment and sales start. I have to think that's the period where social media can shine like no other channel. And because there's more conversation happening during the road to sales, I'd propose your media dollars will be even more effective once sales do start (since you haven't lost touch with people over the last few months).
The space between the purple and green is missed opportunity ... the Conversation Chasm.
Why is the purple way of doing things so common? Three things come to mind ...
Communications and marketing still operate in silos. Communications normally handles product announcements; marketing kicks in for actual sales start. At times very different messages. Very different agendas. Not ideal. How to solve it? CMO builds a bridge and everyone gets over it.
Retail dependence. To me the real genius of Apple Stores is not the design and experience control the company has; but rather the timing control. They don't need to sell in. They are on their own timeline. They can avoid the Chasm altogether by virtually eliminating the road to sales phase. Apple is like Ali compared to everyone else's George Foreman.
Old school thinking. Paradigms are paradigms because thinking otherwise is threatening and scary. I wrote about the descructivness of this behavior a few days ago. That's how I feel.
That's as far as I can take it this Saturday morning. Feel free to chime in.
Nice point made yesterday at a private event thrown by Facebook to support their Facebook Studio initiative. Paraphrasing a speaker from Facebook (and adding a bit of my own take) ...
Traditionally, marketers have played a game of bowling: Take a heavy, well-crafted message and throw it as hard as you can down the media lane, with the goal of knocking over as many customers as possible.
But today's marketer needs to think more like a pinball wizard: You take a slightly lighter projectile, and still thrust it in the field of play. But unlike bowling, in pinball the message stays in the play-of-field much longer, taking twists, turns and lucky bounces as it goes. There's a flow. A continuity. A viral element that never existed at scale.
I like the imagery. And let's be real ... do you really want to be like this guy?
I’ve noticed something lately I can only describe as the Personality Paradox (mostly because I’m a big fan of alliteration).
It’s simple: When it comes to engaging in social media, bigger brands (alliteration! OK, I’ll stop pointing it out.) tend to have smaller personalities. This shouldn’t come as a huge surprise.
In the case of a big brand there are myriad factors that can cause this Paradox. First off, having a big personality takes a ton of effort and focus. Add to that regulatory/compliance issues, organizational challenges, multiple marcom agencies, new management and a million other things, big and small. Or worse, simply losing sight of the customers who got you there in the first place.
The perfect parallel is a rock band. The unsigned band playing half-filled clubs is going to cherish every fan – no autograph unsigned, no photo request denied, no interview not granted, no Tweet unanswered. But as that band gains a following and eventually breaks, the demands on their time and attention increase, forcing them to (1) triage inbound requests and (2) start speaking to their fanbase as a whole, rather than as individuals. Oh, and as their egos inflate, they often quickly forget their most loyal base.
As with anything of this sort, there are always exceptions.
Vans is a brand that immediately comes to mind. And lest you think Vans is a little skate punk operation, they are owned by a holding company (bought for nearly $400mm a few years ago) that owns Nautica, North Face and Wrangler to name a few. So it’s pretty cool that whether it’s their Twitter handle, blog, Facebook page or any other social profile, Vans stays true to their skater beginnings – everything from the imagery to the language and content they feature feels totally authentic. And their community manager, “Nikki S,” is in my opinion one of the best in the business. Responsive, helpful and funny, all with a little bad-ass attitude.
Vans not big enough for you? How about Ogilvy client, Ford Motor Company? Just take a look at how they enthusiastically jumped into Google+, or the delightful and highly personalized way they invited bloggers to an event earlier this year. I’m biased, of course, but don’t you think this is a great example of a huge enterprise acting like that unsigned band trying to make it to the top?
What are some quick takeaways for big brands?
Put a face and name to your social efforts. Logos are good, people are great.
Put as much effort into developing your voice as you do your content. It’s not just what you say, but how you say it.
Always keep an eye on experimentation. Try new things. We all fail – it’s nothing to be ashamed of, and might engender even more admiration.
What are other big brands (or bands, while we’re at it) that buck the paradox? What’s their secret sauce?
I'd rank guest list as the single most important factor in a successful cocktail party. Has to be the right mix of people with similar, but not too similar, tastes. They should be really excited to be there and ready to shake it up a bit.
There are two way to build your guest list ...
The most logical and effective way is usually to network among your friends (or entities like social clubs) to meet a few really interesting folks who will, in turn, invite a few of their interesting friends. This will ensure a varied, but vetted, mix.
The second way is to buy your guests. Perhaps you run an ad on Hollywood Blvd inviting people to come. Or maybe you offer everyone who attends something free (and expensive). Either way, just make sure you're cool with the fact that many of the guests aren't there to really hang out, and probably won't ever come back. And also, expect to spend a lot of money in the process.
It's your call. There's merit in both, depending on your objectives. If want to throw the BEST party, option 1 makes sense. If your sights are set on outdoing the Jones family, option 2 could work.
KILLER HOST
After the guest list, the host is the next most important factor to a great affair. You can invite the most interesting (or just the most) people, but if you don't have a host who can get the conversation/dancing started, your party is doomed.
As the host, have you thought about your welcoming remarks? Have you poured over your guest list to determine what connections you might make? Have you thought about how you'll handle an unruly guest, or someone who comes expecting free stuff, and whatever you're offering isn't enough?
*if you haven't figured it out yet, this post has nothing to do with cocktail parties
DECOR
Decor is tricky. You want to make sure the space is visually pleasing, but not overwhelming or distracting from the conversation. Enough cool things to look at and interact with (and for people to tell their friends about, so they come to the next event).
Not all of us are gifted in this area, but some of us refuse to acknowledge our limitations. I've been to plenty of otherwise nice parties that fall flat on the decor. Usually the problem is that the host is hellbent on pushing their style, rather than thinking about their guests.
I tend to include food and beverage in the decor bucket.
PARTING GIFTS
So what are you giving people to remember their great experience? What's that artifact that will sit on their coffee table or office shelf that will remind them of your great event? Even better, what will get their friends, family and co-workers chatting about the party, and jockeying for an invite to the next one? You have thought about this, right?
As Keith describes it, the blog is about inspiration and creative sparks that often skew towards strategy, advertising, marketing, branding and packaging.
Or in my case, 127 year old restaurants.
Here's my entry. Make sure you check out others on his site.
He put his hand on my head, like one of those TV preachers. "You're good people, baby."
And at that moment, I was healed of all that ailed me.
But this was no mega-church. And he was no preacher, though he shared the same mega-watt smile.
This was P.J. Clarke's - the original on 3rd Avenue and 55th Street in Manhattan.
And He is Doug Quinn, bartender and subject of a 2010 New York Times article.
For serving cheeseburgers on plain white plates, with no frills.
For not offering "Free WiFi!"
For having one tiny TV tucked in the corner of the bar.
For the meatloaf special.
For serving ketchup - Heinz of course - in a bottle and not a silly ramekin.
For attracting suits, punks, grandmas and newborns.
For being the place where my wife and I shared so many unremarkable, yet special moments during our many years in New York.
For not having a hair out of place every time I return for a visit.
Disclaimer: Due to several conflicts (including children, work, wife, The Office, Jersey Shore and sleep) I had to schedule this post 12 hours in advance of it going live; meaning I might not have the latest information on the talks between the concerned parties. However, that has no material impact on my main points. Trust me, I’m a journalist.
With that out of the way …
By the time you read this the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between NFL owners and the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) will most likely (see disclaimer; and even if there is a 24-hour extension of the CBA, as reported Thursday afternoon, this thing will eventually come to blows) have expired, leaving the two sides without a labor agreement and the 2011 football season - or at least part of it - in serious jeopardy.
As a sports fan, I’m totally turned off. As many people will tell you, this is billionaires fighting with millionaires over sums of money unfathomable to the vast majority of fans (Charlie Sheen excluded, of course #winning!).
As a marketer, and one who currently focuses on social media, I’m keen to keep a close eye on how the dispute plays out in public, particularly in social media. This is the first pro-sports labor dispute of the social media era (the last being the National Hockey League during the 2004-5 season, when MySpace was hardly a hotbed of sports discussion and Facebook was just blooming as a place for Zuckerberg to exact revenge on a girl who slighted him - at least that’s how the movie goes).
It’s 2011 (you’re welcome for that nugget) and I can’t help but imagine the stream of opinions flowing effortlessly from the Twitter feeds of NFL players, owners, media and fans as the dispute moves into the grind-it-out-let’s-pretend-we’re-all-working-towards-the-same-goal-when-really-we’re-just-interested-in-protecting-no-actually-growing-our-pile-of-money phase. In fact my crack research staff tells me that between February 15-28 there were 11,000 Tweets mentioning “NFL and lockout.” Just since March 1 there have been the same amount.
The NFL is a public relations juggernaut, second only (in my opinion) to the NBA. And it’s worth noting that basketball faces this very same situation next year; though as many sports writers have noted, the NBA actually needs a battle like this to realign a really broken compensation scheme; whereas football seems to be in pretty good shape. In any case, I’m sure commissioner Stern is paying very close attention to the public sentiment as owners prep for battle with the NBA players union. In fact I bet this post makes his morning clip pack (#DavidStern #Stern #DStern #NBA #TallAndRich #TheDecision #GoBulls).
But while NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has proven to be a disciplined voice for the league, he can’t control what has already been, and will continue to be, said on the social web.
But he can influence it.
See what I did there? Can’t control. Can influence.
Below are a few tactics I would expect the league to employ, as I would any brand heading into a very public battle. As a marketer or fan (or fanketer - helloooo Urban Dictionary), what have I missed?
Paid Search Using Google’s AdWords Keyword Tool I took a look at the competition against the search term “NFL Lockout” and found it surprisingly low. What if the NFL launched a SEM campaign against terms related to the lockout, driving people to either an FAQ on the NFL.com domain or even a Facebook page? Seems simple enough, and moderately effective at delivering a message to people actively seeking out information.
Live Listening I’d be shocked if the NFL doesn’t already have in place an incredibly robust real-time monitoring solution. The challenges, I suspect, are twofold: (1) How are they filtering the signal from the noise and (2) What are they doing with the intelligence gleaned from the monitoring. Which leads me to my next point …
Response Protocol All the listening in the world won’t do you much good if you aren’t analyzing, looking for opportunities and disciplined about how you do/don’t engage with supporters and detractors alike. At Ogilvy we often develop bespoke response protocols based on the issue, the client, the nature of the discussion and other factors. The NFL must be really clear and consistent in their response protocol about what they say, when they say it, to whom they speak and what tone they take. Conversation Management Whether it’s to the 2.6 million fans on their Facebook page or their 1.9 million Twitter followers, the league must carefully map out what they are going to say publicly on the matter, where they’re going to say it and how, if at all, they are going to react when publicly challenged (or lauded). Effective conversation management, very much tied to the response protocol, is kind of the backbone of everything the league is going to do (on social media) during this time. They must get this right.
Content Creation You better believe the players are pumping out content to tell their side of the story. Check out the video below from the NFLPA’s YouTube channel, which has garnered 152K views.
What’s troubling, from the league’s standpoint, is that a pretty sophisticated YouTube user (me - don’t laugh) can’t seem to find the NFL’s official YouTube page after about 30 seconds of searching. And guess what - I give up. So the message here is that not only do they have to consider a content creation strategy, but just as important a distribution and optimization one as well. By the way, not just video but also photos, written content, etc. - anything that can be indexed by The Google and helps the league put forth their perspective.
This entire episode will be interesting to watch play out. As a fan I truly hope they resolve it sooner than later so we can get on with a great 2011 season. My wife, probably not so much.
I work at Ogilvy Public Relations. The views expressed on this blog are my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer or its clients.
