'Fitting In' Versus 'Breaking Through' -- The Differences in Brand Relationships

Brands and agencies often talk about connecting with consumers as a means of disruption, or a way of cutting through all the media clutter.

However, R/GA’s Nick Law said it best: “Instead of asking ‘How do we break through?’, marketers should be asking ‘How do we fit in?’”

Here are what the differences might look like:

BREAKING THROUGH

• rising up against the tide of consumer adoption, as opposed to riding along with it
• pushing underlying messages more so than creating conversations, or better yet, building brand stories
• looking at products as a consumer affinity, instead of value adds as a lifestyle choice
• exhibiting hubris – thinking that your brand destinations will guarantee engagement
• thinking of utility as a technology solution, not a cultural benefit
• deferring to shock value, instead of social value
• planning merely in terms of a campaign, instead of creating currency that can last indefinitely
• capturing consumer attention, not building loyalty
  

FITTING IN

• thinking about all marketing functions as somehow cause-related
• bringing a higher purpose to all brand interactions and purchase decisions
• socializing all media efforts by creating experiences that can be shared, regardless of platform or channel
• enabling people to adopt brand stories as their own, or, collaborating with them to create new ones
• recognizing that people are loyal to information & content, not destinations
• moving with market demand, not ad inventory demand
• crowdsourcing product development & marketing outreach when necessary
  
• not being afraid to fail in the process of developing new consumer insights
  

Please, by all means, add to the list!

Brands: Imitation is No Longer Flattering... Let's Go Back to War.

There is something to be said for the good ole’ days when brands pulled no punches in an attack/counter-attack mentality that resembled chess matches in a public park. What was once a “less filling, tastes great” environment has now become a breeding ground for geckos, ducks, lizards, bears and a slew of other negligible icons that act more out of self-importance than they do in calling out the value propositions of their competitors (actually, I like the Sobe lizard – we tweet each other occasionally... Sorry, dude). Further, when you look at the technologies being used to communicate these sentiments, parody seems to be the theme of the day. Granted, in the 80s and for most of the 90s, we were limited to a default suite of three types of media – print, TV and radio – but that’s entirely the point, and a fairly obvious one at that: if we now have more to choose from, why aren’t we doing more? More importantly, why aren’t we doing things differently?

Time to differentiate. Time to stand out and start delivering knockout punches.

Without giving away free ideas (God forbid), let’s examine some inverse relationships that can lend to this notion of ‘reactive advertising’... And some of the potential consumer touch-points.

Greenwashing – alright, so pretty much every brand on the planet is touting some form of green-friendly something or another. In some cases, it may be true, but in many, this amounts to spin-doctoring of the highest order. I know first hand because I’ve worked with activist groups like NRDC and have seen some of the abject bullshit that these companies sling at the public. That said, this has to be the lowest hanging fruit for true, green-compliant companies to tout. Here’s the catch: most consumers don’t know what ‘green’ is, so there’s an educational curve. You’ll have to spend the time and the money to teach first, then tout your wares second. But if you can, you can certainly knock a few of the big boys off the green block.

Company Culture – this one seems like an easy tactic, although I’m sure there are a number of red flags. You probably can’t call out the fact that a competitor’s CEO is bedding a bunch of young blondes – I mean hey, those are just allegations – BUT, you can point out how great your own little cultural ecosystem is. You don’t hear a whole lot about employee testimonials, or better yet, why an employee defected from the competition. If you’re smart enough about it, you can give consumers a real glimpse inside of the very thing you have with each other that makes for a good product.

Labor Practices – yet another dicey element, rife with potential legal crossfire, but I think we all know a few major brands out there who are cutting major corners in this regard. You can take a more diplomatic approach and discuss how strong employee benefits lead to a stronger product... And of course, insinuate, insinuate, insinuate!

Pop-Culture Trends – now this is an area where I simply do not understand why brands don’t take more potshots at each other. For example, there’s a certain automotive company that recently ran virals of gay dudes washing one of the Transformers cars as a co-promotion – LAME. If I were a competitor, I would have a field day with this. Further, you can run a whole initiative of different stories that jab the competition just by looking at the material they post online.

Random Stuff – Further along the UGC front, there are so many nuggets in the rough coming from people all over the world that can be re-purposed and expanded upon, and even made ‘category relevant’. Just use your imagination. Your creative teams will thank you.

All in all, if advertising wants to stay relevant, it better start taking more risks. All the fodder is there, so let’s look at the flaws within the system to garner new insight into what can be done. And won.

Posted via email from goonth's posterous

The Theories Behind Connectivity - On Production & Products

On production and products...

You may know your product better than anyone. But what you probably don't know is what that product means to everyone.

Perception is key, and ever-changing.

Production is the art of understanding your audience.

Producing content is about aggregating ideas and reshaping them perspective and context.

Producing great content is about the experience you associate with that product, and one that you can share in perpetuity. 

33% of online Americans sat they engage in product research to help them make a purchase decision. (Insight Report from MarketTools, September 2008). Forrester estimates that almost $400 billion of store sales - or 16% of total retail sales - are directly influenced by the Web as consumers research products online and purchase them offline. This will grow at a 17% CAGR over the next five years, resulting in more than $1 trillion of store sales by 2012. Affluent visitors (with annual incomes of more than $75K) are most likely to research products online before buying (43%). (Insight Report)