Bad Marketing

Is display advertising a waste of time?

The "Good" - building your brand where consumers are spending over 50% of their media time

A comScore study last October showed that only 16% of Internet users click on display ads, with 8% of users accounting for over 85% of all clicks.  Does that mean no one should use display ads?  Hell no.  It means that display is for branding your business not trying to drive action (that is what Search ads are for).  Does anyone doubt that TV/Radio/Print ads can build awareness of a brand?  They typically don't drive immediate calls to a business but they do build brand awareness over time so that when a consumer has a need they evaluate that product and hopefully buy it. 

Studies by comScore and others have shown that display ads, regardless of clicks, generate significant lift in site visits and both online and offline sales by those exposed to the ads.  This "lift" is has been proven time after time so why do businesses think their campaign isn't working when they see a low CTR?   Just like TV ads or any other offline media advertising, display is about carving out space in someone's mind so they remember you when they are ready to buy. Fortunately, display advertising is so cost-effective (low CPM) that most businesses can afford to now brand themselves online where they couldn't with expensive traditional media alternatives. 

Can you have too many followers?

The "Bad" - having so many social followers that conversation becomes impossible

I just read another great article by Clive Thompson in this month's Wired Magazine.  "In Praise of Obscurity" points out that socializing doesn't scale.  This seems like a "duh" observation in the real world since we all know that its impossible to chat with everyone at a large party (40-50+ people). 

But online it's a bit easier to "converse" with lots of people since they all aren't "there" at the same time.  That said, once you get more than a few hundred followers social stops being social according to Thompson. "It's no longer a bantering process of thinking and living out loud.  It becomes old-fashioned broadcasting."  And further, "when the conversation gets big enough, it shuts down.  Not only do audiences feel estranged, the participants also start self-censoring.  There's no pretense of intimacy with the audience, so there's no conversation to spoil." 

The lesson for businesses is that while it may seem cool to have many thousands of followers, it makes it impossible to realize the value of the relationship and conversation with each person.  Why use social media if you're just going to blast messages like an email newsletter.  Wouldn't you rather use social tools to have relevant and timely conversations with your best customers?  And if so, are Facebook and Twitter the right tools?  I don't think so.  Business conversations seem out of place on Facebook where I go to check in with my friends, and Twitter is really better for short frequent broadcasts than long/deep conversations.  There is clearly the need for a better tool for businesses to connect with their customers. 

To Control, or Not Control your Brand That is the Question

The "Bad" - allowing employees to build their own brand at the expense of the company brand

 
The leading analyst firm Forrester announced last week that their analysts can no longer have stand-alone "off-site" blogs but rather need to blog on Forrester's official blogs.  There is a lot of chatter about this decision and Josh Bernoff provided a semi-official response on the popular Groundswell blog.  In summary, as an intellectual property company, Forrester believes blogging is an extension of their product which is intellectual property, and which they pay the analysts to create.  Therefore it is sub-optimal to have popular analysts build their own brand which they can then easily take with them should they decide to quit Forrester.

I am facing the exact same situation in my company and am struggling with the decision.  Should I allow all our field personnel to create their own blogs and market themselves under their own names?  Or should I get them to blog on our platform under the company brand?   There are pros and cons of each approach but I think I'm coming to the same conclusion as Forrester.  These folks are under our employment and as such are paid to promote the company and differentiate us from the competition.  The little brand benefit we get from all of their individual promotion is offset by confusion created in the market by 500 different brand voices. 

I need to explore a solution in more depth but my initial thought is that we need to create a standard company branded platform from which the field representatives can market themselves.  This is the approach that many real estate and financial services firms take.  I'm not saying it is perfect but the pros appear to outweigh the cons.  Let me know how you dealt with this issue. 

Leadership Lessons from Colin Powell

The "Good" - applying leadership principles to make your team more effective

I know this is loosely related to B2B marketing, but I read a great article about Colin Powell's leadership principles and thought about how I could apply them to my marketing team.

Here are my 5 favorites out of the 18 lessons in the article. You can find the rest at Chally.com.

1. Being responsible sometimes pisses people off. My thoughts -- You have to make the hard choices because most people won't. You can't procrastinate, treat everyone equally or worry about being nice. Doing that only makes things worse for everyone.

2. Never neglect details. When everyone's mind is dulled or distracted the leader must be doubly vigilant. My thoughts -- You have to execute the details or the strategy is worthless. Vision alone does not equate to success.

3. You don't know what you can get away with until you try. My thoughts - In today's hyper competitive market (especially in my space - online marketing) you can't be timid or sit around waiting for approvals. Better to try, fail and learn from it than to do nothing. Of course you need to take measured risks not reckless ones.

4. If it ain't broke don't fix it is the slogan of the complacent, the arrogant or the scared. My thoughts -- You have to constantly be trying to improve your strategy, tactics, processes and execution because the competitors are not standing still.

5. Plans don't accomplish anything. Theories of management don't much matter. Endeavors succeed or fail because of the people involved. Only by attracting the best people will you accomplish great deeds. My thoughts -- You have to have the best people to get the best results. And you have to create the right environment for success - that means managing by getting into the trenches, leading by example, rewarding hard work, innovative thinking and creativity while weeding out the poor performers (see number 1 above).