Saturday, March 27, 2010

Item #8: The Future of Advertising IV

Recently, I spoke as a panel member to the MBA class at the York University Schulich School of Business on the topic of The Future of Advertising and Marketing. I shared my thoughts with the audience as a series of headlines, which I’ve shared as a little series. Here’s my last in that series:

Headline 4 and Final: Culture Will Matter More








In Headlines 1 through 3 thus far, I’ve talked about the notion that Content that Engages is bound to live on. I’ve talked about the need for Agencies to begin to behave again like partners of clients, but within the parameters of an Evolved Definition of Partnership. I’ve also noted that our measurement of success requires Metrics of Impact, not Eyeballs or even Engagement.

If I wrap it all up, I believe that The Future of Advertising belongs to those agencies that place their organizational focus in three (slash four) areas: Analytics is one; Creativity is another and Style is the third. And consequently, that Culture Will Matter More.

Analytics is the large bucket I use referring to the information we need to derive insight, make smart decisions, plan well and measure our success, in the interest of continuous improvement.

Creativity is the process by which the synthesis of vision, information, idea and craft are brought together to produce original, interesting, game-changing content that people want to engage with. We know that creativity is one of our most important resources today. You only need to spend some time with Daniel Pink’s A Whole New Mind to know that it is creativity that will take society, especially North American society, to it’s next level.

And Style… Style is the word I’m choosing to use to describe a new manner of interaction between people who work together, whether colleague or client or supplier. Rosabeth Kanter has outlined the 5F’s for the Corporation of the Future: Fast, Focused, Flexible, Fun and Friendly. These are factors of human interactional style identified here… as much as, if not more than, they are operational factors.

Which brings me to Culture. And why Culture Will Matter More. More than any time in history perhaps, agency success depends more on soft human intangible skills than machines, formulas or even processes. Which is why Culture Matters More. Culture is the element that establishes the behavioural patterns, attitudes, and values that spread and become shared and hence characterize an organization. And “Culture is not only a way to foster identity, it is a source of creativity, an essential element of innovation.”*

Culture will be more of a proactive consideration for the leaders and managers of agencies, and it will be more of a point of evaluation for employees, clients and suppliers.

* (The Impact of Culture on Creativity, A Study prepared for the European Commission (Directorate-General for Education and Culture).

And thus marks my last headline in the series from The Future of Advertising talk at York University. What now?

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Item #7: The Future of Advertising III

Recently, I spoke as a panel member to the MBA class at the York University Schulich School of Business on the topic of The Future of Advertising and Marketing. I shared my thoughts with the audience as a series of headlines, which I’ll share as a little series. Here’s my third in that series:

Headline 3: We Need New Focus on Metrics of ‘Impact’

















For as long as I can remember, we’ve had a hard time measuring communication effectiveness. We know that when we advertise, sales increase, and when we don’t, they drop off.

With broadcast mediums like TV, magazine, newspaper and radio, we are able to measure how many people see or hear an advertisement (reach) and how many times (frequency). In the online space, we’ve gotten fancier and we’re able to track impressions and click-through rates and time spent. Measurement in the online space is considered advanced because suddenly we are able to get past measures of ‘eyeballs’ to measures of ‘engagement’.

So we have communication metrics: how many eyeballs did we presumably reach with this advertisement and how long did we keep those eyeballs engaged. And we have business metrics: how did sales react.

But as the marketplace grows increasingly tentacled and complex, the words of Trout and Ries resonate louder and louder in my head: ‘Marketing is war. It is a battle waged in the mind of the consumer’ (recalled, not exact).

But we don’t measure what’s going on in the mind of the consumer. At least, not enough. We don’t focus enough on measuring ‘impact’ on this battleground. But we need to. We need more focus on ‘impact’ metrics.

If the battle is in the minds of consumers, then we need to be measuring how well a brand is owning and protecting its distinct territory in the minds of consumers. Communications are designed to do that – carve out a distinct and compelling territory for a brand in the minds of consumers. So we need better ‘impact’ metrics to help us determine how effective we are being in doing just that. And then, we need to be mapping those ‘impact’ metrics against communications activities to really begin to understand what’s doing what.

Because it doesn’t necessarily matter if we reached 5 million eyeballs and kept them for 12 minutes. And arguably it might not be that much of a point of success to have driven high levels of sales if it’s only a short term return. What is important is that the communications brands deploy have ‘impact’. And that ‘impact’ must be in owning and protecting a distinct and compelling territory for your brand inside the minds of consumers. Because that will lead to long-term business success.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Item #6: The Future of Advertising II

Recently, I spoke as a panel member to the MBA class at the York University Schulich School of Business on the topic of The Future of Advertising and Marketing. I shared my thoughts with the audience as a series of headlines, which I’ll share as a little series. Here’s my second in that series:

Headline 2: We Need New Language










I propose that a big part of The Future of Advertising is that we need new language.

I say this in reaction to having recently overheard someone say that “Advertising is dead”. Maybe this is true. If we are talking about the old kind of intrusive, boring, ‘let me tell you, viewer, what I want to tell you and hope you will do precisely what I expect you to do’ kind of ‘advertising’, then, indeed, that kind of ‘advertising’ may very well be dead.

But I contend that engaging content with a commercial message is alive and well.

This year, the Superbowl, the Grammy Awards, the Olympics, and the Oscars all drew record audiences. And, definitively in at least two of those cases, the ‘ads’ were a crucial part of the tune-in interest. This year, viewers could log into a Youtube channel to view all Superbowl ads and rank those they liked most. And a flurry of comments in the online space blossomed on Day 1 of the recent 2010 Vancouver Winter Games with viewers commenting specifically on the Olympic ads.

http://www.youtube.com/user/adblitz

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sports/2010wintergames/Brilliant+immigrant+another+golden+Olympic+moment/2629960/story.html

Just look to the incredible success of pass-on viral phenomenons like Dove Evolution (at more than 10 million youtube views, yes, it’s still worth referencing) and more recently the Old Spice ‘ads’ (with more than 5 million youtube views in just over a month), or even the instant success of brand-loaded video-film Telephone featuring Lady Gaga and Beyonce (already almost 4 million youtube views in less than two weeks).

Here, we see that the audience is hungry for engaging content even with a commercial message.

I also heard someone say that advertisers need to focus on placing their advertisements where people are watching; the recommendation was to find those properties where people are attentive, and unable or unlikely to skip the commercials and to place your advertisements there.

BUT… if we change our language, and we place our focus on creating engaging content even with a commercial message, then we won’t have to find places to stick ‘advertisements’, they will take flight all on their own.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Item #5: The Future of Advertising I










I spoke as a panel member to the MBA class at the York University Schulich School of Business yesterday on the topic of The Future of Advertising and Marketing. I sat on the panel alongside a Globe and Mail Editor and a Professor of Marketing from York and we followed a keynote from a representative of Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment Marketing.

We were asked to respond to a series of questions, loosely summarized as:
- How is the role of the advertising agency changing?
- What skill sets do marketers need today that they didn’t need previously?
- Where are the eyeballs?
- Do you think the days of mass marketing are over?
- Evoking Seth Godin, should you just try to reach the people that are listening?
- What are the ways to reach the consumer and improve stickiness of the message?

I shared my thoughts with the audience as a series of headlines, which I’ll share as a little series over the next couple of weeks. Starting with:

Headline 1: Client and Agencies Are Moving Towards a New Definition of Partnership

50 years ago, think Mad Men, clients and agencies were partners. They worked together, to outline long-term plans, to lead strategic thinking, to determine scope of work, to share resourcing discussions, and most importantly, to take risks. There was a relationship basis to that partnership, and hence working styles and a working environment that fell out of that. Clients and agencies were more invested in each other, there was more trust, and hence there was more risk-taking.

Somewhere around 20 years ago, advertising agencies became suppliers; the valuable planning and strategic leadership work was being done by hub offices in London or New York and ‘global’ plans and platforms were distributed to regional offices for adaptation and execution. Hence, replacing partnership, trust and the resulting relationship, the measure of performance became ‘do what we say’, fast, affordably and effectively.

But both clients and agencies are beginning to realize the shortcomings of that approach now. We can’t have globally developed platforms work in that way anymore, just farmed to regions for adaptation and execution. It just doesn’t work. Canada is not America, is not Europe. New York is not Toronto, nor is it London. And certainly someone has to be understanding and addressing the uniquenesses of sub-cultural places like Montreal, Halifax and Vancouver. Strategic leadership is required again, to meaningfully create communications that live off global platforms but that are relevant and compelling to regional audiences.

So, the opportunity is being created again, slowly and differently, for agencies and clients to again work in partnership…. BUT…. big caveat here… all that was expected and altered by the era of supplier-ship has not been forgotten nor will it be abandoned. The demands, driven mainly by the market, are still for fast, and effective. Now, agencies need to bring the best of partnership – strategic leadership for the creation of relevant compelling BIG IDEA communications PLUS flexible, fast, accountable execution of all aspects of building and deploying those communications.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Item #4: Barbie Gets Modern

Recall a comment I made on a Brandchannel discussion wall about a year ago:


Up until recently, I, all-powerful Mom, would indeed have answered ‘No’ and not bought the toy. But… interest has been piqued of late. It seems as though Barbie might be realizing she needs to woo ‘Mom’ more than the girl.

Now, Tory Burch, Philip Crangi, Kate Spade’s Deborah Lyyod, Lorraine Schwartz, Isaac Mizrahi, Rachel Roy, Monica Botkier, Justin Giunta, Albertus Swanepoel, Betsey Johnson and Alexis Bittar are all ‘dressing’ Barbie. (http://blogs.glam.com/glamchic/2010/01/25/barbie-gets-new-designer-duds/)












Betsey Johnson’s Barbie

And most recently, Christian Louboutin has collaborated with Barbie on the limited edition 'Dolly Forever' doll.












Photo via Net-a-Porter http://www.fashionmagazine.com/blogs/fashion/fashion-news/2010/03/04/fashion-news-louboutin-barbie-the-power-of-alexa-chung-and-halston-to-relaunch-menswear/

Finally, and lest I forget, just last month, Barbie announced her two new professions - computer engineer and news anchor. (http://newslite.tv/2010/02/15/new-barbie-jobs-computer-engin.html)








So I am drawn back to the topic of the Brandchannel discussion:

Does the Barbie brand represent modern feminine identity?

Betsey Johnson? Christian Louboutin? Computer Engineer? News Anchor? This Mom is much more inclined to think ‘Yes she does’. And darling daughter might just be getting one for Christmas.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Item #3: Why Words Matter

My inbox greeted me recently with a daily message from an industry publication. The headline caught my attention because it compared a client relationship issue to a serious mental disorder. The association was meant to draw attention, and it did, but it nagged at me, for the following reason:



Language affects thinking. We should concern ourselves with the words we use to describe things as a responsible response to a principle called the linguistic relativity principle, or the Sapirs-Whorf hypothesis.

What this principle states is that “thinking is shaped by language, that linguistic categories define conceptual ones. The idea is that discourse doesn't just convey thought but partly determines it.” (wikipedia.org)

Or more simply:

“If we change how we talk for the better, we'll change how we think for the better.”

(C.G. Prado, 2006, Political Correctness: Changing language to change thinking).