by scott.gillum | Jul 18, 2012 | 2009, Marketing
Original post date February 5, 2009
What if you could create a trend that could make your product “THE” hot product? Think it’s impossible? Maybe now, but in less than two years it will happen.
I saw something a few weeks ago that gave me chills when I thought about the potential uses. The tool is…in a sense…the world’s largest and most sophisticated digital listening device. It was built to monitor chatter by those “not so friendly” folks that see the US as the “evil empire”. (Let’s just say that Homeland Security has got this one nailed.) Yes, other companies have similar tools but nothing reaches the size, scale and scope of this one (consider this, it has archived ALL the web pages in the ”www” for the last three years).
Anyway, we’re helping to develop a commercial use for the tool and I as was watching the demonstration, I couldn’t help but think about Malcolm Gladwell’s book
The Tipping Point. Many of the concepts he wrote about, I was now seeing play out in real life. This gigantic ear could easily determine who the “
connectors” of the digital world are (in real time), “The Power of Context” as Malcom refers to it (in over 20 languages), and when something is going “viral”….all with very sophisticated algorithms and complex math.
It got me thinking, could it also determine how to create a trend? According to the team that developed the tool , it can’t yet because it doesn’t assess and/or integrate a number of important factors needed to understand the audience and what drives behavior. But if you combine the power of this tool (and other similar tools) and social networking…I believe that we are getting close.
A few days later a colleague sent me this post. Facebook is studying “sentiment” behavior. Right now it’s limited to things like how “nasty news is impacting stock” and when folks are “going out” but it can, and will evolve quickly. To this point, Zuckerberg has not really monetized his platform yet, unlike Murdoch with MySpace.
So could this be the “killer” app that drives Ad sales into Facebook? It’s too soon to tell at this point but it sure sounds good. With
222 million unique visitors sharing very personal information with most of it in the public domain this might be the next piece to fall. Throw in
Twitter and marketers will soon have the ability to understand what’s “hot” or has the potential to be “hot”, who says it’s “hot”, why they’re saying it, where they like to buy “hot”, etc.So the question to marketers is…if you have the opportunity in the near future to make your product the “hottest” thing…could you? You currently have the ability to access massive amounts of consumer data today and that will grow dramatically over the next few years. What are you doing with it now and what might you do with this information in the future?
One thing is for certain, it will require new capabilities, vendors, and tools to interpret and draw out insight. Get ready now, it’s coming… and in this situation there will be a clear early mover advantage.For now, go back and re-read The Tipping Point (replace Hush Puppies with UGGs) and start dreaming about the possibilities, especially what it would take to make it happen. Think about this for a second: you could start a trend for a product that doesn’t exist…demand before supply…yea, that’s “HOT.”
by scott.gillum | Jul 16, 2012 | 2008, Marketing
Original post date November 3, 2008
Click on the image above. Now this is how you market in a down economy. Over the past year I’ve focused on the virtues of Web 2.0, but it’s time to give a “shout out” to ol’ school direct marketing, especially when it’s done this well. It’s from Boden, a children’s clothing catalog company.
This letter is a virtual clinic on how to do DM right. Things to love about this piece:
-
- Quick Service Number – immediately connected to my account info…they know me as a customer…and that I’ve bought (a lot apparently) in the past. Most likely, it also serves as a tracking code. Bonus incentive: if I use it when I call I will receive free shipping, which would probably be the case anyway but they’ve given me an incentive to give them the tracking code.
-
- The Opening Sentence/Paragraph – it’s about me (actually, my wife) right out the gate. You’ve maybe got 2-3 seconds to connect with the reader nowadays, and you can’t start out with what you want or who you are because the reader doesn’t care. I also know what you thinking, how is it that your wife shared a letter like this given the comments that we bought “armfuls” last year and we were “one of their best customers.” Two reasons; 1) she’s an ex-agency person and appreciates a good piece like this, and 2) the letter mentions that we’re not buying as much this year…there’s the positive spin.
-
- Use of Levity/Comedy – this is extremely hard to do well and it is a bit edgy but I love it…makes you want to read more. The use of British humor (this is a UK based company) also adds to it. Folks have been saying for a while that the best creative has been coming out of London. Got to admit I’m seeing more and more evidence of that…but I also have to giving credit to the Geico Gecko (the Martin Agency) for paving the way here as well.
-
- Personalization – from the owner/founder Johannie Boden herself. Have no idea what her first name is or even if she’s even a real person… could be Tommy Bahamas’ sister for all I know, but I like the personalization. Hands down, DM from an individual to an individual always has the best response rates. Writing good copy that sounds likes it’s coming from a real person and not just a signature, that’s another story…maybe even another post.
-
- Customer Buying Behavior – they’re obvious tracking and have noticed a change in my wife’s habits; this is critical in a down market. Watch your best customers and their transactional behavior…probably should have started last year but it’s never too late.
-
- The Solution/Offer – Look up DM best practices and “the experts” will tell you that you should test multiple offers… 50% off, half off, or buy one get one free, and you should, but in today’s economy real dollars savings is a real winner. Simple, tangible and it can be combined with other promotions. “Ol’ whatshername” came up with a custom solutions just for us. She determined that the most likely reason we haven’t been buying lately is price –and she’s dead on…their cloths are on the high end. Back to school this year meant going to Macy’s with a hand-full of 10-20% off coupons.
-
- Limited Time Offer – yep, got to have it. And the time period is getting shorter and shorter. Seeing an interesting trend with the use of limited time offers. This use to be the go to “hook” for PC manufactures and mass merchandisers now I’m seeing it in all kinds of retail situations, and most interesting is it’s use in fund raising. Mobile opens up a whole new dimension look for that next year on Google’s G1 phone. Instant offers feed by GPS that expire very quickly…use it now or lose it.
-
- Creative – notice that the offer gets a third of the page, and is very colorful with offsetting large and small images. The $20 offer is supersized and next to information on where to redeem it. Your eyes are drawn to it immediately and it’s the motivator that determines whether you’ll invest the time to read the text above it. It is also perforated and complete, so if I only read the offer and tossed the top, I would have everything I need to understand and use it. Notice how they personalized the offer…”…I run out soon.” Love it!
At the end of the day the ultimate measure of good DM is performance/results. In my house, it killed but then again we were an easy target…they knew us all too well.
by scott.gillum | Jul 14, 2012 | 2007, Marketing
Original Post Date April 23, 2007
The Define & Align the CMO report is avaliable to today after 2 years in the making. The report actually turned out to be more interesting than we orignal thought based on our working hypothesis.
The year-long research by the CMO Council and MarketBridge encompassed qualitative and quantitative interviews with CMOs, CEOs, board members, senior marketers and executive recruiters throughout North America. The 80-page report, priced at $295, along with a complimentary executive abstract, is available for download at http://www.cmocouncil.org/.
Here’s a teaser of some the insights coming out of the research:
- Confusion over the role – the casualty rate of Chief Marketing Officers can be reduced if CEOs and boards better understood the role, requirements and value of a CMO and empowered the right individuals to architect all aspects of a company’s operations around the customer experience.
- “A Fixer Upper” – the report points out that title inflation, unrealistic expectations, flawed hiring practices, talent deficiencies, and lack of requisite business and strategic leadership skills are big contributors to the limited shelf life of CMOs. The research also points to the fact that 50 percent of executive searches are to replace incumbent CMOs who are primarily hired to fix broken marketing organizations, not drive business value.
- R-E-S-P-E-C-T – the study uncovers startling contradictions in upper management: most executives consider the CMO a valued member of the executive team, yet they also believe many CMOs lack the background and skills needed to be a top managementplayer – a challenge numerous senior marketers share with their CIO counterparts at many companies. Additionally, in a sharp commentary on the connection between strategic value and performance, most CMOs involved in top-level decision-making get high marks from their CEOs for their overall performance, while those CMOs who remain in tactical mode get significantly lower grades.
- Show me the Money! – nearly three-quarters of the C-suite executives surveyed consider the marketing organization “highly influential and strategic in the enterprise.” At the same time, nearly two-thirds also say their top marketers don’t provide adequate evidence of ROI with which to gauge marketing’s true performance.
- Getting a Grade – In a clear sign of the strategic role played by marketing executives, nearly 70% of the CMO respondents to this study report directly to their CEO. However, only 40% of that number get an A grade for their performance from the CEO…most likely the ones who could demonstrate their value! For the most part, CMOs get more respect from the boardroom than from the CEO. Most of the board members surveyed, over 80%, believe that within the next two years, the CMO position will gain greater credibility with the rest of the management team. But in another reality check, less than 20 percent also say that an increasing number of CMOs will rise to the CEO position.
- Longer Tenure – A majority of the recruiters surveyed believe that CMOs have a shorter shelf life than other C-level executives. The average tenure of CMO respondents to this study was 38 months. (In a past report, the search firm Stuart Spencer pegged the number at 23 months). We had a professor from a top business school involved in our research…he’s a data/analytics guru. He was also familiar with the Stuart Spencer report, here’s a dirty little secret…CMO’s your tenure is longer than what SS reports. Don’t believe the hype…they are an executive placement firm.
The research concluded that the most successful CMOs are aggressively instituting rigorous performance measurement and analytics in every aspect of their organizations, and tying those metrics to revenue and profit growth.
by scott.gillum | Jul 12, 2012 | 2007, Marketing
Original post on January 5, 2007
Caveat: I wrote this post 2 years prior to joining an advertising agency. It was based on my experience working with clients and their agency “partners.” Having now been “in the business” for close to 3 years now (with a mid-size agency), I wasn’t too far off the mark.
The Big Agency Model
Dissatisfaction with the “Big Agency” business model has recently made the news. Some are calling for a new advertising model, that the old global network model is dead. Here’s one man’s cynical view of why and how the “game” really works.
The Game
Big agency wins account with contract “pitch team”, innovative creative, and a promise of a global platform designed to create consistent communication, production efficiencies, and improve program/people spend, etc. The client drinks the “kool aid” but then quickly comes to realize that it was a sham.
The first play of the game comes with the introduction of the lead account manager, who looks nothing like the person introduced as the account manager in the pitch. Shortly afterward the signed scope of work, they start to doing an impression of the “invisible man.” And the once senior and experienced account team also starts disappearing, only to be replaced by fresh faced staff of kids just out of school.
The account relationships sputters along with marginal program/campaign performance. The client BU’s and regions get fed up with the “Global Platform” (never getting the attention and team promised) and start going outside using smaller, more responsive agencies (who happened to be the talent that left the big agency).
The innovative “creative” shown to win the account turns out to be the only truly creative thing produced in the last few years and it gets recycle in multiple pitches.
Big agency realizes the account is at risk and begins acquiring the smaller agencies serving the client to secure the account. If the client is willing to commit to retaining the agency after all this…they promise to win them an award and get them really good concert tickets.
Again, this is just one man’s opinion…I could be wrong.
by scott.gillum | Jul 12, 2012 | 2006, Marketing
Over the years I’ve marveled at the speed at which some organzations are able to go from concept to in-market execution…and those who can’t seem to get out of there own way.
Dell, for example can “turn the ship on a dime”…changing promotions, campaigns, and the sales compensation plan for telesales reps within a day or two in order drive greater revenue or profitability based on quarterly performance projections. Other companies struggle for years to get a campaign or product out the door.
So why does this happen and what are the keys to quick execution? Beyond corporate culture, which is a major contributor to the ability to execute, there seems to be four essential elements that I like to refer to as the CRAP Process:
- Create – one of the things that I’ve noticed over the years is how efforts can stall or be delayed at the starting point. Getting past the starting gate is typically the hardest and most difficult point in the process. Anxiety builds, expectations are high, everyone is looking for the “big idea”…it all adds up to a huge speed bump slowing the creative process. Lower expectations by getting something-anything into a first draft, no matter how ugly right after the initial discussion or at some point on the first day.
- Refine – after you have the draft, send it around for comment, refining the concept as it goes from person to person. The chain is email and the document is in word; it’s important to use the edit feature. It’s like a game of “hot potato” – you only get so much time to hold onto the email and then you need to through it to someone else.
- Act – the most important point in the process is getting it 70% completed and then get it into the market and/or to a customer and let the market/customer complete the other 30%. Define the “70%” mark early in the process so you know how far to go. Give the team an expectation on the timing (within 3 weeks, etc.) to be in market.
- Perfect – yes, perfect the product or campaign after it is in market. Sounds counter intutive, right, but companies do it all the time…Microsoft comes to mind immediately. The key is setting the expectation on peformance before you launch. Define performance at each stage of the process so that you know what to go back and refine/fix. Too many companies get caught up in trying to create something “perfect” internally without customers or market input. The age of what I like to call the “Incremental Perfectionist” is upon us.
You’ll also need to build your teams around this concept. You need to identify the skills sets and personailities of your team and designate a couple of “starters” (the creative types), the “refiners”(usually specialists – product, industry, etc.), and the “perfectors” (anal types who love the detail). You may find that this approach trumps any typically”Org Chart” approach in creating a high performance team.
The other important thing to remember is if you are afraid that someone is going to scream about a mistake or poor performance then you don’t have enough going on inside your organization. The key is to have lots of activities at various stages of execution, if some fail, folks may not notice because high performing (Perfected Stage) programs will give you air cover to refine the underperformers.
As someone at IBM once said; “if you are going to fail…fail fast”. The real key is go fast at every stage, the best companies learn more from failure than success…they also know how to get CRAP done.
by scott.gillum | Jul 12, 2012 | 2006, Marketing
The promise of a “performance-based” contract or a “risk sharing” agreement sounds so appealing on the surface but does it really live up to its lofty billing? Do customers really only “pay for performance”? And/or get what they are paying and if so, what does it take to make that contract work?
The Promise
The concept has been around for many years and has been used successfully in the Public Sector and Health Care industries. Additionally, it has also been a very successful way to sell certain commodity products. More recently it has caught on with companies providing web and tele services.
Research on the prevalence of this pricing model shows that in marketing, online marketing services are dominated by “pay for performance,” especially in the area of search and advertising.
This trend is also carrying over to non-web based lead generation services like teleprospecting. With companies offering performance-based or risk sharing models, it seems like a good business decision when spending precise and sometimes hard to track marketing dollars.
But not so quick! It does sound good on the surface but read on to find out how it can go wrong.
“At Risk” Contracts
I recently had the opportunity to assess an outsourced lead generation program for a Fortune 500 company. The CMO of the organization was frustrated with the performance of the vendor and was close to terminating what had been a relatively successful 5 year relationship. Before that occurred, she asked me to assess the operation and the performance of the vendor, including the new Performance-Based Contract with an “At Risk” clause… recently forced on the vendor.
After visiting the operation and evaluating the program I concluded that:
- the vendor was actually performing exceptionally well given the situation
- the performance-based clause in the contract was causing counter productive business practices,
- the reason the vendor was not hitting their lead targets was actually the client’s fault and not the vendors.
The interesting part of the story that the CMO didn’t realize was that the vendor had 5 years of response data (by campaign, tactic and channel) including lead conversion rates by campaign type. The vendor also had very precise and predictable conversion rates for each stage of the pipeline. It was only a matter of flowing the right volume of responses from campaign activities into the top of the pipeline to create the number of leads needed to meet the target. All very predictable and a perfect set up for a performance-based contract, right?
Except there was one major problem…guess who was supposed to create the responses? That’s right, the CMO’s marketing team.
This tele-qualification program was an inbound group that qualified responses coming from the client’s marketing efforts. Unfortunately, the client was not producing enough response for many reasons: under performing campaigns, inconsistent campaign activity with some months being totally dark, etc.
What is a vendor to do?
They start running their own campaigns to fill the gap because they don’t want to see their fees get hit. Here’s the not so funny part — their marketing campaigns start outperforming those of the client. Ha, Ha …the client is paying the vendor to follow up on their campaigns’, the only problem is that when they do the vendor loses productivity.
The vendor now doesn’t want to follow up on certain campaigns that it knows will be produce less than 10% response rates (because its own programs are producing 14%). Keep in mind the vendor owns 5 years of campaign response rate data it also can predict the lead yield from the client’s campaigns and so it begin to decline to participate in certain campaigns.
The vendor has now turned the tables on the client and is actually holding the client to its own version of a “performance-based” metric for campaigns, except it doesn’t tell the client that and it appears to the client that the vendor is now not only underperforming but also hard to work with because it doesn’t want to do certain things it knows are of low value.
Are you starting to see the mess?
Making it Work
First, create a real partnership with your vendor. Don’t put them in a situation where the performance clause of risking fees is used as a threat. A true “At Risk” model can be very appealing to senior management but may make the day-to-day vendor managers life a living nightmare.
If you decide to create an “At Risk” clause, be willing to add the “At Reward” clause as well. I’ve seen plenty of companies go for the fees at risk but balk at paying for performance that exceed targets. If you’re not willing to pay for the upside then don’t bother with the downside.
Finally, performance-based contracts can be a win for everyone just know that a vendor can’t do it all by themselves. It takes two to dance “the high performance dance” and if you’re not willing to do the “Tango” the dance can turn ugly. You start stepping on toes, tripping over each other and dancing to a different tune. I’m talking real ugly…think Jerry Springer on Dancing with the Stars.
