Shaw & Todd - Advertising and Marketing Communications

I’m being asked this question all the time, so I thought I’d again jot a few words down on the subject. The super-short answer is a resounding ‘YES!’. This thing we call social media is simply too widespread to be ignored (or avoided). It’s now yet another media tactic that needs to be utilized, whether you are delivering a message, soliciting feedback or trying to ascertain what people are saying about you. More and more B-to-Bers are going the viral video route (with mixed results; more on that in a future blog). But social media is so much more than creating a funny video and posting it to YouTube (more on that in a later post, as well).

A couple weeks ago, Boston-based communications group Cone released the results of a study they conducted that gauged whether Americans expect companies to have a presence in social media.

Some highlights:

• 43% said companies should use social networks to solve customers’ problems
  
• 41% said companies should solicit feedback on their products and services
  
• 37% said companies should develop new ways for consumers to interact with their brand
• Men are twice as likely as women to interact with companies via social media

There’s also a great presentation that Universal McCann made available awhile back that surveyed 17,000 Internet users from 29 countries. Some more interesting nuggets can be mined from this one, such as:

• 44% of people surveyed have a blog (compared to 28% in 2006)
• 57.5% have a page on a social network (compared to 27% in 2006)
• 69% visit brands’ official websites for product information
• 82% prefer to search for information on a search engine or to read people’s comments on personal profiles on social networks like Facebook

Stuff to sink your teeth into, to be sure.  Moral of the story? Get social media on your radar immediately. If you don’t know where or how to start, you can always contact Shaw & Todd.

Since such an enormous amount of us are using social media in some way, shape or form, it’s natural for us communicators to try to figure out how to leverage/use social media in our marketing efforts. I’ve been to seminars, client meetings, and networking events where this very subject has been discussed and discussed and discussed and discussed (you see what I’m getting at). For those of us marketing to scientists, we couldn’t have been happier when Bioinformatics and PJA posted the results of their survey: “The New Collaboration: Social Media and the Life Science Opportunity.”

Kudos to those involved with the study. While there’s nothing earth-shattering about the findings, we need data like this to pore over. So before I lead you to the report, I do want to offer a quick comment on the top answer to the question: “In which social networking sites do you currently participate on a professional basis?” Number one answer: The Science Advisory Board, by an enormous margin (69% to 2nd place finisher Nature Network’s 24%). Huh? Here’s why: over half the survey participants were registered members, and most likely active participants, of the SAB. So maybe that result is a bit skewed. I can accept that. Otherwise, there’s some great info in there, and therefore a must-read for anyone currently marketing to the life scientist.

Check out the study here.

How have office politics played a role in your advertising? Have you spent waaaay too much time discussing logo size? Argued over a static vs. animated banner? We’d love to hear about it!

I recently read an interesting article in B-to-B magazine about Alpha vs. Nonalpha companies and their business styles. Briefly, companies are categorized into two distinct thinking patterns. Nonalpha companies live in the moment; reacting to market trends and competition, while Alpha companies continually look to the future, anticipating and even creating market trends.

Contrary to author Wes Ball’s opinion, I think being a Nonalpha company isn’t the worst thing in the world - after all, not every company should strive to be Google, Dreamworks Animation or Trump Organization - the Alpha-Alphas of the world. However, if a Nonalpha THINKS it’s an Alpha company, there’s bound to be problems. That’s just a downright identity crisis.

Using Mr. Ball’s classifications, we’ve worked with both types of clients - growing with Alpha companies, and sweating it out as Nonalpha companies reallocated marketing funds towards sales incentives and rebates. Personally, I think (hope) that the line isn’t so clearly drawn, and that a prosperous company benefits from a combination of these styles. Let’s call it…Midialpha thinking. Or Semialpha. Quazialpha.

No matter where a company lies in the Alpha dimension, it’s important to connect with the end-user. Not only that, but it’s critically important to pass on a value, not just a feature. It’s the value that creates loyalty and sets a company apart from the rest of the pack. For Alphas, Nonalphas, and Somewhereinthemiddlealphas.

This is probably one of the top 5 client requests, right up there with “too much white space” and “let’s bold the phone number.” Anyway, what’s the justification for super sizing a logo? For years, I’ve sought proof that a logo enlarged by 10% translates into more sales or even more awareness, but alas the proof is more elusive than the treasure in Capone’s vault.

In my experience, many advertisers don’t understand that a logo isn’t simply a trademark design representing a company. The logo is the embodiment of the organization. The logo must have meaning and that meaning not only comes from a customer’s experience, but also from carefully crafted messages and images in the form of advertising. Oftentimes, clients feel that the first thing that needs to be seen is the logo. Not true. In my mind, it should be the last. And most importantly, the messages that precede it should support and enhance the values that the logo stands for.

I went to the bank today to address a CD that was maturing. In reviewing all of the current options, the bank advisor politely told me that if I were to let it roll over into a new term, the interest rate would drop by 75%.

Whhaaaattttt?!?!?!?!

I had to bite my tongue and mentally scream the mantra, “don’t shoot the messenger!!” to maintain my composure. Watching the tears of anger and poverty well in my eyes, he explained, “Interest rates are dropping in today’s climate, there’s nothing we can do about it.”

Is this true? In today’s culture of instant … everything, is it possible to capture someone’s interest, or is this interest rate also spiraling downward; a victim of perpetual information overload?

IMHO, all is not lost. Interest rates are evolving, for sure; and successful adaptation is necessary to stay competitive. With streaming videos, social networking, podcasts, Ruby On Rails, Bluetooth®, and an array of other funny-sounding platforms and technologies, it’s easier than ever to get instant access to your audience, and vice versa. The same goes for your competition, too, so it’s more important than ever to stand out in the crowd. This is where messaging is critical (and S&T’s specialty), but we’ll save that topic for another day.

Suffice it to say, tactics can certainly grab attention, but the true rate of interest should be measured by the response to the message. The perceived value in the message is what sparks your targeted customers to take action.

And begrudgingly spurred by value, my humble monies remain in the bank’s cybervault instead of my mattress. For now.

Marketing Your Product to the Wrong Target.

A company is very excited about a new product introduction. Marketing communications initiatives need to be developed immediately. The budget is determined, the campaign is created and media is purchased.

At the end of the day the campaign is a flop and not getting the response that everyone hoped for. Why? Because the message was crafted with the wrong target in mind– the advertiser.

All too often, the wants, needs and desires of the customer are overlooked. This is all part of an unfortunate marketing malady we call “talking to yourself.” There are a variety of symptoms too, they include:

• No cohesive strategy (”What!! That’s too expensive!”)
• Messaging that is the same as the competition (”It worked for them!”)
• All benefits and features included in every execution (”Let the buyer sift through it, they’re bound to like something!”)

Penny wise pound foolish? We think so. Just because a marketer’s budget doesn’t rival Proctor & Gamble doesn’t mean they shouldn’t apply a simple truth; the customer is buying the product, not the manufacturer, not the advertising agency, not even the sales and marketing department. Let’s listen to the market. Find out their wants and needs and how to intellectually and emotionally connect to them. Once this becomes part of the marketing discipline, we can then develop unique messages targeted directly to the most important person in the process—the customer.