Kaleidoscope

Overheard in marketing plan, creative briefing and review meetings:

“I want to do something on mobile”

“Can you create an app for this brand – We’ll figure out later what to do with it”

“I don’t care about all this just make sure my brand is present in the digital space”

“Let’s start by creating a Facebook Profile Page”

“I need a viral campaign just like the Old Spice one”

“Augmented reality is the next big thing – can you think of what we can do around that”

“We need a flash website”

“Online Video? – I spend a lot of time watching YouTube.”

“Let’s socially engage on this campaign”

“I have to get to 10% of spends on digital.”

Let’s leave these “quotable quotes” aside for a moment.

With the advent of technology, one would think that the quality of executions would have improved – and I think it is true. Over the last 5-7 years we have seen some really great work in this space – Creativity at its peak and fuelled by technology.

BUT we have also seen extremely bad campaigns.

I think technology has essentially widened the gap between the good and the ugly – simply put technology has essentially driven up ‘net mediocrity’ [defined as Ugly-Good] in advertising.

Strange, when you think that technology should ideally be enhancing or raising the quality of work being done in this space as it essentially enables you to do stuff you would never have thought of executing previously.

Let’s get back to our quotes at the top … And I think the answer to our ‘net mediocrity’ lies there. The single element that is common across all those quotes is the clear unwavering focus on the platform/technology/execution.

And … if you think about all the great work that wins awards and delights consumers, the focus is different – the focus is that one great idea which makes you go ‘wow’. Clichéd but still very much the truth – Great ideas drive great executions…. And technology amplifies it and gives the idea a life.

Why should the approach to delivering breakthrough campaigns change or be any different with the advent of technology?

Also, digital is not a checklist …You don’t necessarily have to have every single possible digital platform in your plan, nor do digital elements have to exist in every single execution.

We need to stop the focus on … What to do on mobile?  And start looking at … How does this great idea get a meaningful amplification on mobile?

So lose that digital media checklist and get back to the drawing board because… IT’s STILL ABOUT THE IDEA, Stupid!

It is quite amazing how Coke has been driving open happiness across the world. I came across two examples on You-Tube – the happiness truck in Philippines and the happiness store. Simple ideas brought to life innovatively.

Google started off as a search company but over the last few years it has managed to churn out innovations on a regular basis – some were clear successes like the Android operating system, the Android marketplace and some were not that big hits like Google Wave and Google Buzz.

Being an Apple fan I did get a bit upset about the launch of Ipad 2. Just when I closed a tough negotiation with my 2 year old son on the rules of how we share my ipad, Apple springs this surprise on me. But in the context of the tablet market hotting up with almost everyone now jumping onto the bandwagon you have to laud Apple’s effort of ensuring they remain relevant. And while the rest try and figure out how they can outdo the ipad hardware or software, I can already see an Ipad 3 or maybe something completely different changing the rules of the game on the horizon.

Got me wondering …how can these companies churn out innovation so fast? How have they made innovation a habit? – And habits die hard.

A lot of it has to do with the culture of the organisations. Driving innovations are so embedded in their DNA that churning great ideas has become a habit.

My hypothesis is that most companies that don’t succeed are fairly brutal and unforgiving when it comes to failure because an individual decided to do something a little deviant from the regular age old proven formula.

So … how does an organisation make this a ‘habit’ … How does innovation become part of the core?

But first  … Is ANY form of innovation a desirable goal?

Everybody wants to innovate – But it is important to point out that not all kinds of innovation are great. Innovation has to be meaningful and meaningful Innovations are those that add some value to the consumer or unlock another unrealized need.

To make innovation a habit in an organisation, the first step is to create a culture that breeds innovation.  Cultures shape habits, create practices and enforce values.

And who creates this culture? – People [also known as the employees].

Organisations need to look internally to drive innovation before expecting others [agencies and external partners] to drive it for them.

All innovations start with an idea and if the idea is born and bred internally the chance of success will be higher. Internal ownership will drive quicker go-to-market and focussed attempts to give the idea a life in the form of an implemented innovation.

So here’s my next question…  Does your employee appraisal process reward risk? Are you challenging your employees to drive value through meaningful innovation?

Innovation can never be an outcome of performing routine tasks or things done as per the manual.

Open any dictionary and you will see that Innovation is defined using words like ‘new’, ‘different’ and ‘against tradition’. So how can you expect someone to deliver something new without ensuring significant reward for the attempt?

Even functional leads should have a regular scorecard which captures the number of new ideas that came from his team… How many of them saw the light of the day … and how many were meaningful innovation which drove incremental customer value or unlocked an unrealised need.

In my previous post I spoke about shortened innovation cycles and high ‘nimbleness’ quotient as factors that have pretty much become hygiene in current hyper competitive environments.

This small step will challenge teams and individuals to think out of the box and who knows out of the 20 new ideas that you get there will be that one which will lead to a game-changing innovation.

So the next time you complain about lack of innovation ask yourself what are you doing to enable it? Are you helping create that culture? How much do you value risk?

Recently, the big story doing the headlines across most news sites and blogs was the Nokia & Microsoft strategic alliance. But I found as a far more candid and  thought provoking reading the article that did the rounds a couple of days before that –  the  ‘leaked’ internal memo written by the Nokia CEO, Stephen Elop.

The blunt memo from Stephen to the Nokia employees essentially laid bare the sorry state of Nokia – Falling far behind Apple in the smartphone segment, a non-competitive operating platform in Symbian and Chinese devices killing them at the lower end price range.

To get his point across he used the story about a man stuck on a blazing oil rig with two choices facing him – stand on the platform and be consumed by the burning flames or jump 30 metres into the freezing water.  The man had to make a choice and he chose to jump and take that risk – he survived.

A simple story making a very strong point – and Nokia took the plunge.

The Microsoft alliance is probably just one of the outcomes of that jump. Whether this will help them survive and come out stronger only time will tell but at least they jumped.

As I was reading the memo what also stood out was Stephen’s outlining of what happened at Nokia when competition was about setting the platform on fire – He says and I quote “we fell behind, we missed big trends, and we lost time”.

This was in the context of Nokia but it holds true for almost every brand, marketer and agency in this time of hyper competition and rapidly changing technology shaping our operating environments.

Let’s face it – The scarcest resource with us is time and with innovation cycles becoming shorter by the minute time is becoming even scarcer.

It is no longer about finishing first but about being relevant. If one has to survive for the longer term one has to be in a constant evolution mode.  There is really no time to sit back, relax and enjoy the fruits of short term victory.

As a marketer, how much time and effort are you spending looking at and evaluating trends? What new platforms have you adopted in the last 6 months? What’s your innovation cycle? Has it become shorter over the last few years?

As an agency, how current are you? Are you staffed in line with changing trends? What is your ‘nimbleness quotient’? How quickly are you able to execute campaigns on new and emerging platforms?

If your consumer adopts and adapts to technology faster than you, you will be extinct in no time. Consumers are not going to wait for you…  she has enough and more choice.

So unlike Nokia, who waited for their platform to be set ablaze you can start making a difference now …  or would you rather wait for someone to ‘start the fire’. That just may become too late…

Looking back at 2010… One can easily say that the biggest thing to hit the ‘advertising space’ was Facebook.  The word ‘like’ has made its way into marketing jargon with brand managers tracking ‘likes’ more than ‘equity’ movements as part of their regular scorecards.

And …even getting into 2011, one of the top stories to hit the news was the Goldman Sachs valuation of Facebook at $50 Billion. One might argue both ways whether the valuation is too high or low. Given the rate of growth of Facebook, the fact that it is slowly making its presence felt in Asia, the fact that there are still plenty of untapped potential advertising opportunities and that we can expect better access through mobile will probably indicate that the valuation could have been higher.

But there exists a very thin line between ensuring quality user experience and the greed of advertising revenue. Both those have an inverse relationship with each other and if not balanced well can easily change trends. The valuation puts a lot of pressure on increasing avenues to increase the revenue from advertising. Any compromise in user experience in the pursuit of incremental ad revenue could make the current valuation turn out to be grossly high.

Given the simplicity of setting up profile pages, Marketers are jumping onto the Facebook bandwagon.

Brand profile pages start cropping up every other day. You have desperate brand managers and account executives sending out ‘carpet bombing – like’ requests pleading you to like the page. Feeling pity at the state of desperation one obliges. Over a period of 4 weeks the ‘fan’ bases swell up, this is then followed by a very well crafted PR story. If the fan base is large enough maybe an attempt is made at an award entry. If one successfully manages to fool the jury then it is quick fame and fortune in the form of silverware for the cabinet at the reception…. and that’s it. The profile page, having done the needful, will probably just remain as is till the current set of brand/account executives move on and fresh blood takes over and decides to “integrate Facebook” into the new strategy.

Some other marketers find Facebook to be an easy way to create that ever-elusive online destination – why invest in a website when this is clearly an easy way out?!!! Putting up everything that there ever was to know about the brand — starting from product line-ups to the latest print ads to information about the formulation and packaging – Fairly boring, irrelevant to most and mundane information.

The approach essentially defeats the purpose of the profile itself.  I would refer back to my first article where I emphasized the role of each element of the plan. The role that Facebook plays is very different from a website. I am a big fan of actually focusing on a cause or a movement which the brand can support,  extend  a loyalty/CRM program, community gaming/contests, enabling a sharing of experiences via Facebook.  Of course, there is absolutely no harm in having a link to the brand website giving members an opportunity to find out more about your brand.

Last thoughts …  While integrating Facebook into your overall communication plan ask yourself:

• What is the role of this page? Do I already have a website? How are the roles differentiated?
• Am I leveraging the “community”?
• Am I using the page to “listen” to my Fans?
• Am I enabling “conversation”?
• What am I doing that will get them excited to join this community?
• How often [real-time] am I talking to the members of the community? Are the conversations meaningful?

The reality is that brand-building is no longer completely in the hands of the brand manager only, instead it is community-driven. The sooner the marketers realise this the better would be the quality of marketing communication plans.

Some brand Facebook pages I like are – Starbucks, Coca Cola, Red Bull, Toy Story, purely because they truly leverage the community. Have a look at the pages and you will know exactly what I mean.

Change is cyclical, inevitable and it happens across every aspect of our lives…

The world of media and communication has also changed regularly with exploding choices and quick adoption across markets and consumer segments.

And this is more so when it comes to digital platforms.

Digital media has seen constant and continuous innovation ever since Berners-Lee uploaded the first photograph in 1992 onto the World Wide Web.  The scary thing about change in the world of digital media is that the cycle of change is getting shorter as individuals embrace the media much faster – Facebook is just 6 years old – Who would have predicted that it would reach 500 million [and counting] profiles in 6 years ?  Gaze into as many crystal balls as you can, but you are not going to figure out the next “Facebook” that easily.

Such is the dynamic environment that we are operating in – It has never been more difficult to build brands than now and it is only going to get tougher.

So how do marketers prepare themselves better to handle change and continue to be relevant in this dynamic environment?

One doesn’t have to look very far or unearth some deeply hidden consumer insight to attempt to answer this … Just focus on a simple consumer truth …

‘Consumers tend to adopt platforms quickly but what doesn’t change is their need to be entertained, informed and educated [learn new things]‘

Marketers need to invest in content – content that can live on multiple platforms and screens. Content that is portable, relevant and that addresses the simple human desires to be entertained, informed and educated.

The problem is that most marketers assume that content = branded entertainment. Branded Entertainment is just one form of content – Content can take multiple forms e.g.:

eBooks, podcasts, music, video, blogs, webinars, whitepapers, infographics, widgets, images, contests

And can inform, educate or entertain

The large marketers have already realized this and you can see this with the likes of Coca Cola, Unilever and P&G being in the news recently – either bringing established content from one market to other markets or creating new content and weaving their brand story in.

P&G has partnered with Rouge in Australia [rougemag.com.au] to bring content around beauty and grooming to consumers. The next level is of course taking this content into mobile and other forms of media. J&J partnering with Yahoo! on their parenting channel – Yahoo! Baby Talk is another good example of riding on relevant content.  There are similar examples across other markets and categories, but we need to see a lot more of it.

Large MNCs have an advantage as they are present in multiple markets and can port / reapply content from a market to another … but they are not doing enough of it.

Final thoughts:

a) Invest in good [entertaining /informative/ educative] content now.

b) Invest in content which is portable across platforms and screens.

c) Invest in content that is relevant for your brand/category.

d) Invest in partnerships that give you access to relevant content.

e) Invest in a ‘content pipeline’ – invest for the future.

The ‘fairy tale’ of marketers and digital media in this part of the world

Digital media and innovation on digital platforms are hogging the limelight across blog posts, journals, news, discussions – both offline and online. Almost everyone has a point of view on how we should be looking at the opportunities on this platform. Some of that has helped inspire action. But if one were to just compare a share of ‘conversation’ with the level of investment in digital media the imbalance is stark. So why does this ‘fairy tale’ not have a happy ending as yet? Where is it all going wrong?

So our story begins …. Once upon real-time…

As digital media becomes more and more an integral part of the consumers lives, brands, companies and organizations are jumping into re-jigging their media mix to reflect this shift.

Where the ‘syndicated’ numbers don’t make sense, the more ‘risk-taking’ organizations are taking the so -called ‘experimentation’ route by setting aside funds under such heads as ‘innovation’ ‘testing’ ‘learning’ etc to legitimize their investments in this media.

At times the decisions are based on shifting time spent, reach of media etc and at other times mandates from senior management provide the impetus. But whatever the inspiration the outcome is an increased spend level on digital media.

And this is great news …

• Great for the publishers as the increased investment means incremental revenue, more profits and of course increased investment ploughed back into more innovation [hopefully!].
• Great for the consumers as they are exposed to more content online, more choices, new properties etc.
• Great for the media/advertising professional as they can be ‘creative’ in the ideas and executions [Digital platforms provide the opportunity for increased creative executions in a new medium], win awards and generally be excited to have done something innovative and refreshing.
• Great for the marketers …. Is it? And this is where our fairy tale/love story starts taking a bitter turn, as most marketers haven’t got the plot right.

The story starts heading away from the fairy-tale ending as most of the time marketers are not very sure of the role or the expectation from digital media. Basic questions get unanswered and marketers lose focus.

What objective am I chasing?

What do I want the medium/the execution/ the platform to deliver on?

How does this fit into my overall communication plan?

The story starts getting worse when digital platforms start getting evaluated on traditional metrics / metrics which were created to evaluate other communication platforms.

How many GRPs am I going to achieve on this medium?

What is my incremental Reach?

What is the bonus element? How much is the value?

And to top it all and as expected with this inadequate understanding of the medium, the level of investment is usually ‘pittance’ – enough to help with the tick in that checklist.  Enough to tell ‘senior’ management that “this year we invested behind digital”.

Thus begins the vicious cycle of digital spends. It looks somewhat like this.

At times the decision to spend on a particular platform or the role the medium is expected to play sounds like:

“This investment is intended to help build engagement” or,

“We should spend on the latest digital fad, it’s bound to work”

And the worst possible outcome takes the form of:

“Executions on digital platforms work but not for my category or my brand”

And, thus the reason behind the ‘not-so-joyous-ending’ story.

Can we get to a “and they lived happily ever after” end? Or… can we at least try?

So how do we at least try and make the journey worthwhile?

There is no prescriptive solution… But if we start with complete clarity on what our objectives are and what role we expect the different media in the mix to play we will have covered half our journey to that elusive ‘joyous ending’.

I take my inspiration from typical appraisal discussions. Having sat through quite a few of them in my career I find that if not anything else it pushes you to ‘be current’ yet ‘look ahead’.  You might have your boss give you these tips as you review your development plan. I urge you to follow a similar train of thought when you sign the next brief or review a communication plan….

a) NEVER lose sight of your objectives.

• What do you really want to achieve?
  • Try and be as descriptive and action-oriented as possible. Avoid “Motherhood” statements like – “Grow Share”, “Create engagement”. I think the objective of all marketing is to grow share via engaging consumers and motivating purchase.
  • Think of what you want your consumer to do and the role the chosen platform is playing to enable that.
  • Think about the consumers ‘barriers to purchase/interact with your brand and the ways the platform can help bust that barrier.
  • Think about which part of the consumer decision tree are consumers falling out of [awareness? consideration? trial?] and the role that the chosen platform might play to arrest that decline.
  • At all stages of your communication planning process refer back to your objectives.

b) Get out of your comfort zones – challenge yourself.

• Push yourselves to take risk. Risk has a higher potential of exponential returns.
• Don’t let ‘fear of failure’ drive your decisions. If you don’t try you will never learn.

c) Set the right and relevant measures – Don’t force a measure on a platform.

• Measure against your objectives and set the right intermediate measures to measure the effectiveness of the platform.

d) Don’t do it because someone else asked you to do it - Be convinced yourself first

• Invest only if you strongly believe in it, and if you really believe in the power of the platform, it will no longer be a tick in the box.

e) Don’t wait for case studies!!! - create them.

Simple? Meaningful?