You are here: Home / Archives for advertising

The Siren Song of Perfection

January 26, 2010 by Mike Troiano · Comments 

Three software development patterns mashed tog...
Image via Wikipedia

We’re getting close to the finish line on a handful of client projects right now, and I’ve observed that one of the biggest challenges “real marketers” have in embracing social systems is, for lack of a better term, cultural.

It’s almost a cliche now to say that embracing social media means giving up the sense of control marketing communications types are used to in other media. Like most cliches, there’s a kernel of truth in that observation, but it’s only part of the leap we ask our clients to take.

The less obvious but in some respects equally daunting leap has to do with embracing the ethos of successful software development, which differs quite dramatically from the ethos of successful print and broadcast development.

Marketers are shaped by the awareness that a typo in a print ad is pretty much grounds for termination. A brand manager will spend hundreds of thousands on a TV spot to get it exactly perfect before spending millions to distribute it over the air.

But that’s not the way you build software. It used to be, when software lived on mainframes, or whatever. The “waterfall” methodology was a lot like the ad creation methodology, a system oriented to deep and thorough planning before a launch where perfection was always aspired to, and sometimes required.

The problem with this approach as applied to business software was that it took too damn long, to the point that by the time the system launched, the business issues it was intended to address had evolved. To be more responsive, software development methodology evolved toward the sprint or “scrum” methodology, which is all about iteration, and the perpetual beta was born.

Entrepreneurs and social folk have an almost religious conviction about the design-ship-evolve model of creating software. But it’s an unnatural act for marketing folk, with the effect that building social software in marketing applications puts stress on the relationship between provider and client.

Have you seen this? Do you agree with the diagnosis? And either way… what strategies have worked for you in mitigating it?

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Filed under Driving Engagement, The Holland-Mark Way · Tagged with , , , ,

Consumer-opoly: What really motivates consumers?

January 11, 2010 by caroline b. · Comments 

Blogging on behalf of an advertising and marketing firm, I realize that I should be prepared to answer that question, rather than simply pose it; however the truth is that the deeper I dig, the more vexing the question becomes. What actually motivates consumers? Moreover, what motivates consumers to make 180 degree changes in their behaviors, not just switch from one brand of paper towels to another? This weekend I watched two documentaries: King Corn, a film about two Boston boys who move to Iowa for a year to grow corn and subsequently follow the path of their corn through the American food system, and Bigger, Stronger, Faster, a documentary about three brothers, two of whom use steroids, leaving the third brother to wonder whether steroids are as bad as we seem to think they are. Both films challenged my established thoughts about their respective subject matter, but more than that, King Corn left me wondering what on earth it’s going to take to motivate American consumers to think—and buy—differently.

As marketers, we believe that we have the power to help companies do this very thing. Give us the time and creative license and we can show consumers the enlightened path. We can turn Coca-Cola loyalists into Pepsi drinkers via a blind taste test. We can convince people across the land that our toilet paper is softer and stronger using two pound weights and a spray bottle. There is a long-held idealism here: show people the “truth” and they will make the right choice.

But then I watch King Corn and I am reminded why Holland-Mark doesn’t put a lot of stock in consumer research. Fast Food Nation, Super Size Me, Food, Inc., King Corn—every one of those movies is telling us the same thing. With infallible proof and research to back their claims, those films tell us to stop eating the way we eat and demand a higher quality product, because the way that we are eating and the choices that we are making aren’t just gnarly, they are killing us. Seriously. (I even took the time to call my stepfather, a rancher, farmer, and crop duster in Texas, to discuss the information I was taking in. His response was almost exactly the same as the farmers in the documentary: “If people wanted quality food, we’d produce quality food. But people want cheap, tasty bullshit. So that’s what we give ‘em.”)

But consumers don’t care. Or perhaps they (we) do care, but not as much as we care about our ratio of cost-and-convenience to consciousness. I want to eat products that aren’t chock-full of corn and bullshit, but I’m also not willing to go out of my way to find them. Oh, and the cost needs to be the same. In other words, while we can convince someone that Pepsi tastes better, you better believe that if the Coca-Cola is on sale, or just in a more visible spot in the store, that Coca-Cola drinker is going to go right back to drinking the red can.

So what—if not impending death and doom—does motivate consumers?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Filed under Relevance of Offering, Societal Musings, The Holland-Mark Way · Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Holland-Mark 2K10: Capital “M” Marketing in the Imperative Economy

December 30, 2009 by Mike Troiano · Comments 

Turns out we had a pretty good 2009 here in the ‘Mark, and closed the year stronger than any of us expected. We’ve spent the last few weeks reflecting on this momentum, and on what seems to be working for clients and resonating with prospects. A strategy has come into focus around these ideas, and it’s going to have a big impact on our direction going forward.

So what can you expect from us in 2010?

Well, while we’re still going to call ourselves an “agency,” it’s just so folks have a box to put us in. The truth is we’re becoming something very different than that.

Now… I know you hear that from every advertising agency these days. Next time you do, ask whether they’ve actually turned down opportunities to create advertising for paying clients. We have, and I must say it’s been pretty liberating.

We’ve done this not because we think advertising is dead, although that makes better copy than the truth. We’ve done it because we think advertising is the wrong place to start.

The Imperative Economy

We start with an observation. It is that people — in both their business and personal lives — are only spending money on what they consider imperative. Think about how your own behavior has changed over the course of The Gateway Recession. When was the last time you plunked down the Platinum card on something that was just interesting, or even something with just the potential to influence your life? I bet it’s been a while. We buy what we need now, and it’s the same for the spending decisions we make on the job in the “B2B” marketplace.

Becoming imperative has become imperative. And doing so isn’t about “small-m” marketing, meaning, primarily, outbound marketing communications. Good advertising can make a product more interesting, no doubt. But it cannot make it imperative. “Consumers” — as we used to call them — decide what is imperative, and they communicate with each other at a volume and frequency that drowns out all but a very few deep-pocketed commercial entities.

Reality Is Perception

The implication of this is significant: Where once you could focus on driving the product reality by shaping market perception, now you must also gather market perception to shape the product reality.

What I’m saying is what we all know… that Marketing needs to step up, put the crayons down for a bit, and take a seat at the grown-up table. Getting the topline moving in the Imperative Economy will take more than advertising. It will take “big-M” Marketing, meaning a willingness to tackle the substantive issues related to:

  1. the relevance of your offering,
  2. the clarity of your message,
  3. the consistency of your communication, and
  4. your ability to drive engagement among a group of brand advocates large enough to support your business.

Holland-Mark’s Role

We think our job is to help clients establish that cycle… to “corrupt” their vision with the external reality. In a nutshell, Holland-Mark helps businesses connect with, respond to, and benefit from the truth about their customers, products, and brand relationships.

If you come across someone who needs that — and who recognizes the need to change more than just their tagline to achieve it — please drop us a line. In the meantime, we’d love to hear what you think about our conclusions, our approach, and our prospects.

Look for more details soon right here. Be sure and subscribe to our blog if you’re interested.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Filed under Clarity of Message, Consistency of Experience, Driving Engagement, Getting to Imperative, Relevance of Offering, The Holland-Mark Way · Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

The Future of Print Media

December 3, 2009 by Mike Troiano · Comments 

Curious what print media will look like in the future? Here’s what Time Inc. thinks…

We think they’re right. What do you think?

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Filed under Societal Musings · Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Advertising Creates Intangible Value

October 19, 2009 by Mike Troiano · Comments 

Big fan of TED, and LOVED this talk by Rory Sutherland of Ogilvy:

Advertising adds value to a product by changing our perception, rather than the product itself. Rory Sutherland makes the daring assertion that a change in perceived value can be just as satisfying as what we consider “real” value — and his conclusion has interesting consequences for how we look at life.

Anyway, take a look:

So what do you think? Does great advertising add “intangible value,” or sell with lies?

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Filed under Clarity of Message · Tagged with , , , , ,

Next Page »