When CMOs despise their agencies.

Ow! Got a little burned by the acid in the CMO comments in an Ad Age article today.

Agencies are getting "in the way" of advertisers, rather than smoothing the path with online media companies. Advertisers have to do their own strategic briefings with the online ad networks. Advertisers are laying down the law and calling in representatives from 20 ad networks . . . and the law "included no reselling, serving ads only on sites that have a direct relationship with the publisher and full transparency, and the ability to audit every site where its banner ads appear."

Tough stuff.

When you have a client who is ready to deal personally with 20 vendor relationships to that level of detail, rather than work through your agency, it’s clear you’re in trouble.

One of the comments from agencies on this article indicated that the solution is to make sure you add value, come up with new ideas and be sure you stay a few steps ahead of your client.

The tone I got from the article is that the clients wish their agencies were on top of things they should be doing. The clients weren’t asking for new ideas. They wanted competence.

Another commenter threw up his or her hands and wondered why we should bother, because clients are never happy.

I can’t bring myself to agree with that either. With so many hungry agencies out there, why would we see any long term client/agency relationships?  And there are many of those.

Clients are rational and they can be pleased.

There are no comments for this post.

New talent. Old challenges.

There’s no guarantee of life-long employment at the same company. Our economy is becoming increasingly challenging and employees are looking to go where the jobs are. As the recruiter for Hacker Group, my job is to look for qualified and, often, experienced people. And sometimes those experiences bring baggage. Heavy baggage.
A recent management study at NYU examined hundreds of employment applications and the hiring records of many companies. The objective of this study was to assess the cognitive and behavioral aspects that employees developed during their previous stints of employment. In other words, if the job remained the same, what characteristics/attributes did they acquire? The stunning results were called “Cross-Corporation Baggage”—a fancy term meaning that people get weighed down by the baggage they bring from past experiences. Of particular interest were the interviews with executives who noticed that those hired from the competitor came at a premium price. And they turned out to be the least successful hires.
What does this mean?
From where I sit in the niche industry of DM, it means a company should invest in training fresh recruits with little experience so the company has more control over how an employee “fits” and becomes part of the team. They’re not “molded.” Also, the values and culture component need
to be considered.
Values, norms and politics become part of the on-boarding experience as well. They shape us and influence our decisions and actions.
Hiring someone with experience does not diminish the urgency or necessity of training. An employee’s many years of experience will not translate to an immediate high return on investment.
As the technologies and rules of effective marketing evolve, companies will have to consider more than just experience in prospective employees. Experience may not have as much effect on your direct marketing as the type of experience combined with the right attitude and fit. Creativity will foster bigger ideas when the right mix of these intangibles is in place. In considering candidates for any direct marketing positions, make sure they carry the right kind of baggage, whether they travel heavy or light.

There are no comments for this post.

Should you go all-in with digital marketing?

Economic uncertainty can bring opportunities for brave souls.  Many business advisors are telling marketers that -- while cost-cutting is important -- cutting marketing budgets too much can be deadly. Considering the marketing mix becomes crucial when there’s little room for error.

Here’s data from an August survey done by Epsilon:

To offsest budget cuts, CMOs are shifting to more targeted and measurable marketing strategies. When asked how their firm determines target market for each channel, 50% said they use data-driven marketing techniques: 31% stated they use sophisticated modeling tools to analyze existing customer data (behavioral, preference and demographic) and 19% said that they analyze past purchase behavior. In contrast, 28% said they made “rough estimates based on past experience.”

Of course, as a direct marketer, I think CMOs ought to put accountable marketing strategies high on the list -- in good times and bad.  It’s just smart.
But in the same survey, "social computing" was "the most popular emerging channel with 42% of marketing executives expressing interest in adding it to their marketing mix."  The definition of "social computing" in this survey includes word-of-mouth, social networking sites and viral advertising.  At least two of those three -- word-of-mouth and viral -- are more of a crap shoot than something to build your marketing plan around. 
Maybe I’m overstating.  To express interest in a channel isn’t necessarily a commitment.  But it is surprising to me that mobile marketing -- a much more serious contender as an accountable marketing channel -- was only cited by 29% as worth a look (with 22% already dipping their toe in).

There are no comments for this post.

Is behavioral targeting evil?

Lots of behavioral targeting start-ups are going away or slowing down, according to Online Media Daily until "Congress sorts through the rulings."

Part of the problem is fear -- privacy issues haven’t been completely addressed -- and part is that BT hasn’t proven its worth to advertisers.

One proposed solution is a bit bizarre if you’re trying to prove you’re legitimate (and I quote):

Traveling to the United Kingdom to offer the service might be one option for companies offering ad targeting. A source requesting anonymity says Adzilla plans to pull up stakes in the U.S., move to the U.K., and use whatever capital they have left to refocus the technology on a more conventional business model.

Leave the country?  Even if you "refocus" on a "more conventional" proposition, you’ll look like you’re trying to avoid the new rules. I think most advertisers would not want to be associated with that.

Beyond the privacy issues -- even if the whole world opted in -- as we’ve discussed in this blog many times before, behavioral targeting is not ready for prime time. The behaviors being measured have to be associated with the behaviors marketers want.  You can try to sell a neat little what-if scenario that assumes people behave the way we hope they will. (Take a look at my July 22, 2008 post.) In the real world, things often work out differently.  This is the scientific way to approach marketing.

I honestly don’t believe behavioral targeting is, by definition, evil. In fact, as a tool, its power could be used for good -- for marketers and consumers.  But for now, we have to wait and see whether anyone will be allowed to practice BT and, if they do, whether they can find the key to making it work.

There are no comments for this post.

Communicating credibly in a crisis.

At a certain point, people stop believing your messages. For banks, that day has arrived. For political candidates . . . well, I have to think their time for "setting the record straight" may have come and gone. The hysteria has reached a fever pitch and cynicism is everywhere. No one believes anything that doesn’t match their pre-conceived ideas about the candidates.

If you’re going through a troubling time, it’s tempting to pull yourself into a fetal position and wait till the storm is over. Unfortunately, that only makes things worse.

I’m not an expert in crisis management. But I do know something about communicating, as well as building -- and keeping -- trust through your marketing efforts.

If your company has something important to communicate in difficult times, you want to keep what you’ve learned from the marketing department in mind.  If you’re a politician, you should know a thing (or twelve) about communication. 

First, think about all your market segments. A company has its employees, customers, stockholders and the general public (or potential customers) to consider. If it were me, I’d take care of those audiences in that order -- unless, of course, you have a public health crisis on your hands. Talk to employees first. They deserve your honesty. Don’t hide from your customers. They’re your lifeblood. Explain things to your shareholders. And deal with your advertising or PR campaign last of all.

I have a friend who goes online to check her bank account every day. I won’t name names, but its initials are WaMu. The bank hasn’t talked to her as a customer about what’s going on . . . but each day as she signs in, a new tagline greets her. That’s not reassuring. That just makes her a little more nervous. She’ll be moving her money to a credit union soon because the advertising department has gotten ahead of itself and hasn’t talked to customers directly.

After you determine your target segments, where will you find your audience? How can you reach them with the least amount of waste? That’s your media plan.

Then consider the action you want those groups to take. Put the message and offer together that will drive that action.

And, finally, follow through with what you promised. That’s really the only way to build trust or build a brand.

There are no comments for this post.

Love is not enough.

Brand advertisers often find themselves in a complicated relationship with their customers and prospective customers. They are in hot pursuit of customers’ affections. They believe, "If only the world loved my brand as much as they love their iPhone, their Moleskine notebook, their Prius and shopping at Whole Foods, I could live happily ever after."

Too often, a marketer’s love is unrequited or the customer gets involved with a competitive brand and complications ensue.

As with any relationship, attraction is just the beginning. For love to develop, you need something deeper. You need to engage in give and take.

There’s nothing wrong with romancing your customers -- but romance is only a starting point. When you are dating, you don’t propose marriage without having some conversations first. When a love interest tells you what they like, you don’t put it in a database and then forget about it.

The key is to get deeply involved. That’s what separates a temporary crush from a meaningful relationship.

People long to believe that the products they love are made just for them.  They modify their Mini Cooper to suit their style.  The iPod has not just a few, but ALL of their favorites tunes -- and their favorite movies and videos, as well.  The beverage they get at their local café is hand-made to order.

This engagement with the brand, with the molding done by the consumer, is the true goal. Love is just the beginning.

There are no comments for this post.

Marketing strategy in a downturn.

Buy low. Sell high. Now that’s wisdom for the ages.

It’s pretty clear we’re going to be hitting bottom in the economy one day soon.  And we may be hanging out at the bottom for a while.

That’s an opportunity to buy.  As a marketer, you may be able to pick up market share on the cheap.  But it takes guts.  You have to believe you’re going to outlast the bad times. 

My company is in the same position as yours. We’re thinking about how to cut costs during the recession. But we’re still investing in marketing. In fact, one of our unbreakable rules is "Never Stop Selling." 

There are no comments for this post.