IanSchafer.com

A Checklist for Reinvention in a Recession.

My latest post for AdvertisingAge's DigitalNext blog is now live: A Checklist for Reinvention in a Recession.

I firmly believe that alongside some pretty nasty side-effects, this economic downturn can also bring about good things in the form of a digital marketing renaissance. Over at AdAge, I explain why.

Here's a brief excerpt:

Marketing innovations during recessionary times have been proven (and reinforced by smart folks at places such as Harvard Business School) to lead to increases in market share, shifts in brand loyalty, reinforcement of core values and better opportunities to learn more about your customers. In fact, some of the best brands and products have been launched successfully during recessionary periods. MTV, the iPod and Crest White Strips are but a few examples of those.

That's why many experts suggest the thing you shouldn't do during a recession is cut back on ad spending. But it happens nonetheless. Hey, the bottom line is the bottom line. And when that happens, everyone feels it. Publishers, agencies and, of course, advertisers -- both traditional and digital.

Historically, it's the time when everyone starts talking about direct response, search engine marketing and every other bottom-of-the-sales-funnel, ROI-attached ad tactic as "the responsible thing to do."

But while those may be important components of a holistic advertising strategy, what often gets left on the cutting-room floor is a budget for everything else marked with the scarlet letter E (for "experimental"). Display advertising, promotional microsites, social media and other forms of interactive marketing often get that E label.

What are my tips for digital marketing in a recession?

Check them out here.

Change.gov's Creative Commons License. What Does It Mean?

President Elect Barack Obama's transition team recently adopted a Creative Commons 3.0 license for Change.gov, the official transition website.

What does that mean?

According to the license, visitors can copy, distribute, display, and perform material from the site, as well as to remix it, as long as the work is attributed to its source.

What does that mean?

It means that the Obama team is taking this 'open government thing' pretty darn seriously. People will be free to take any material from the site, and do what they wish with it (hopefully constructively) to their heart's content.

Interestingly enough, if this were an 'official' government site, there would be no need for this license as all work would be in the public domain. But since it isn't, the site previously had an 'all rights reserved' claim on it -- meaning you can't just lift material from the site without explicit permission from the Obama team.

So until January 20th, feel free to take Change.gov content and turn it into song lyrics, spoken word performances, leaflets, fliers, and desktop wallpaper -- just make sure you attribute it to the source.

And get this -- after January 20th, you're still cool. Public domain, baby.

More on this from Lawrence Lessig.

The Jam on Bad Social Media Marketing.

So I was listening to 'Start' by The Jam and the lyrics got me thinking of every example of a failed attempt by marketers to use social media marketing tactics to execute on a flawed social media strategy -- especially those brands with image problems.

Take a listen, and see how/if it gets you to rethink things.

It's not important for you to know my name -
Nor I to know yours
If we communicate for two minutes only
It will be enough
For knowing that someone in this world
Feels as desperate as me -
And what you give is what you get.

It doesn't matter if we never meet again,
What we have said will always remain.
If we get through for two minutes only,
It will be a start!
For knowing that someone in this life,
Loves with a passion called hate
And what you give is what you get.

If I never ever see you -
If I never ever see you -
If I never ever see you - again.

And what you give is what you get!

What do those lyrics mean to you?

Sprint: ‘ Meh ’ for Effort.

So just saw a Sprint ad on TV featuring Dan Hesse, the CEO of Sprint, telling me about how Sprint is revolutionizing wireless networks and communication.

At the end of the spot, the flash Mr. Hesse's 'email address', dan@sprint.com. I'll save you the time wondering what happens if/when you email that address. Here's the response you get:

Thank you for taking the time to write to me. There are a lot of exciting changes going on here at Sprint. To really revolutionize wireless as we know it, we need your input. It's so important that we hear from the people out there who are using our phones every day so we can provide the best service. I would like to take the time to read your email carefully and respond. In the meantime, don't hesitate to check out the details of our new Simply Everything plan at www.sprint.com/everything. A representative from my office will be contacting you in about a week.

Thanks again,
Dan Hesse
CEO Sprint

And what kind of response does this generate? I've been checking the interwebs for people's reactions, and this one seems to be representative of the general sentiment:

Granted, it would have been at least a nice touch to use my actual name as the salutation...or to even at least have a salutation. Would have at least created the illusion that another person was on that side of the email, rather than some stupid computer program.

Ah well...just like Sprint. They take one step forward with their advertising, but 2 steps back when it comes to actually responding to people directly. I guess the saying is true: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The only thing worse than not moving towards a more transparent relationship with your customers is only going part of the way.

A Look at Our POV on Social Media.

AgencySpy asked:

“Hey, Ian? What’s the mission statement for Deep Focus when approaching social media? The definition of social media and its associated technology is always being debated, so what are you defining that as? What are you offering clients and what are you working on right now?”

And I responded with a diatribe that started with:

“We believe that Social Media is actually a medium within a medium. Social Media is not search, nor is it direct response, nor is it ‘branding’ or ‘awareness’. This is a medium where most of, if not all content is created by the people that use it. It is involvement. Passion. Influence. Passive and active recommendations. Connectivity. Collaboration. Our simplest definition of Social Media is any area of a digital experience where a majority of the content is either created or influenced by users. There is a very different set of consumer behaviors that occur when reading, writing, or responding to a blog post, or sharing thoughts, actions, and experiences via social networks. Social media is dificult-to-control participatory media, which makes it an environment that makes advertisers uncomfortable.

And you know what? Good.

Uncomfortable situations have the potential to bring out the best in us. They can keep us on our toes. They can sharpen our communication skills. They can improve our relationships by understanding what got us into those awkward relationships to begin with. Advertisers that can accept that they are in an uncomfortable relationship with their customers (and want to improve those relationships) are the ones that are most ready for a foray into Social Media.”

Want a good look under the hood at Deep Focus? Read the rest by clicking here.

What You Can Learn From John Mayer.

You know what brand does an amazing job at communicating with its consumers?

John Mayer.

John Mayer, the brand, has done an amazing job of connecting with audiences through communities and quite frequently, via communication on YouTube. He also doesn't take himself too seriously, frequently spoofing himself, and anything else he deems worth spoofing. He wrestled with pop mediocrity before realizing that there was genuine talent that could still be appreciated (and be successful) by focusing on the things he did best -- playing and singing the blues. When he communicates with his fans, he's genuine, doesn't run everything through his PR firm (or legal, apparently), lets them comment freely -- and actually listens to them, and because of this, is so in tune with them that he knows exactly what to do to elicit a desired reaction.

Take this video, for example. It's a re-imagining of Justin Timberlake's I Think She Knows Interlude from his FutureSex/LoveSounds album. He rocks it, and all it does it get his fans more excited, bring in new ones, and add to his appreciation as a musician.

I can think of no fewer than 20 brands that could take this EXACT same strategy and parlay it into huge success. Yet they don't.

So today, ask yourself, how can my brand be more like John Mayer? Or will you just stand around and not change, while you wait for the world to?

Can Digital Shops Take Over Overall Brand Strategy?

Damn straight they can. But only if digital agencies can become truly interactive agencies.

Confused? Read on.

This article in Advertising Age states that in order to it, however, there need to be four core capabilities: measurement and analytics, audience research, cross-channel integration and social media.

As part of a study to determine whether or not digital shops can hold their own, the article featured seven leading interactive shops: Avenue A/Razorfish, Critical Mass, Digitas, Imc2, OgilvyInteractive, Sapient and VML. All agencies have a minimum of $50 million in interactive revenue and at least a 20% revenue growth from 2005 to 2006.

And here's where I find fault not with the story's conclusion, but some of the study's findings and methodology -- more specifically, the agencies involved in it.

Most of these agencies have core competencies that are built upon only one or two of the above listed capabilities. From the article:

Avenue A/Razorfish was praised for its quantitative and qualitative audience research capabilities and measurement and analytics and broad experience with social media, but according to the report the agency's "overwhelming focus on the digital space means that it's not yet equipped to lead overall brand strategy."

That last line is a broad statement. For audiences, especially younger ones (12-34) that use digital media more than any other medium, why not let a qualitfied digital agency manage the brand strategy? Why is this different from a TV-focused agency leading it when target audiences are watching less television?

A point I agree with is:

VML, Imc2 and Critical Mass were all praised for strong web design skills, but critiqued for relying on strengths in interactive-marketing basics.

"When it comes to web design, they do a good job, but broad interactive capabilities are still anchored in the website," Mr. Haven said.

This is precisely why I started Deep Focus with the aim of being exponentially more than a web-design agency. There is no way that a web development shop, without real research and media capabilities (and not just a figurehead) can oversee a brand strategy. More than being a digital agency, an agency that can really take over brand strategy must be focused on interactive media. And that means shepherding a brand through every channel of interaction with (not just communication to) the consumer. As I've said many times before, "interactive" should not just refer to digital media. "Interactive" media is a philosophy to be applied to all forms of media and communication.

As a matter of fact, the concept of being a communications firm is outdated -- you need to be a conversation firm in order to survive. And if you can be a creative firm, a media firm, and a publicity firm, then you're ready to take on overall brand strategy.

I really do believe that today's interactive agencies will be the overall ad agencies of the future, as long as they remain nimble, resilient, and continue to be thought leaders. Increasingly (and yes, I'm biased) I'm finding that the current crop of independent medium-sized agencies (and yes, like Deep Focus) seem to be best suited for this kind of role. They may not all be digital, but shops like Deep Focus, Anomaly, Naked, and others have the right personality. But I will also add that the best of the best will be able to execute strategy as well as develop it. And it's something I can say that we are proud to be able to do. Execution, or at least a thorough understanding and seamless integration of it, will set interactive agencies that think and do apart from those that can just think, or just do.

So if you're a digital agency with brand-strategy aspirations, but not a truly interactive agency, start looking at the man (or woman) in the mirror and make that change - hoo!

If You ’ re Not Transparent Now, You Will Be.

Ahhh. The wonders of e-communication.

The simple press of a wrong button can mean the difference between an internal order and a corporate fiasco.

In this latest case of corporate irresponsibility and unwillingness to take its consumers seriously, the CEO of Spirit Airlines inadvertently hit "Reply All" in response to an email from a couple who requested compensation due to the fact that a delayed flight led to them missing an event.

From the email:

...we owe him nothing as far as I'm concerned. Let him tell the world how bad we are. He's never flown us before anyway and will be back when we save him a penny."

Should that even feel right when you're typing, much less when you hit "Send"?

Get the full story here.

Chalk another one up for the consumer, getting comeuppance via inadvertent shaming. The only way to avoid this is to respect your consumer and adopt a corporate policy of transparency.

Brand Nudity: I Call Shenanigans on JupiterResearch

I admit that I haven't read the full report (yet), but MediaPost reports that JupiterResearch has concluded that:

Marketers can better reach influential brand advocates through such online tactics as product microsites or product previews rather than through social media like user-generated content or blogs, according to a new JupiterResearch report, "Brand Advocates: Creating Rewarding Relationships."

The rationale? This:

Although nearly one-quarter of online adults are considered influential brand advocates, according to Jupiter, they actually spend more time online researching and purchasing than spreading the word. Indeed, Jupiter said, more than two-thirds of brand advocates research and purchase products online, compared to slightly over half of all online users.

And here's the kicker:

"Although a high level of online activity may suggest the influential brand advocates would respond to social marketing tactics, they are actually more traditional in their manner of research," explained Emily Riley, a JupiterResearch analyst. "This group is more likely to read a blog for information rather than create their own; advocacy toward a product or service is most likely to be generated by word-of-mouth."

What's the problem with all this? This report addresses advertising on social networks. Banners. "Featured profiles". Maybe if some brands would step up and do this right -- use a social network for what it really is...a community -- we'd start reading success stories about brands that brought their consumers closer, and wait for it...actually listened to them.

Agencies are certainly to blame for not taking this seemingly obvious route to connecting with the consumer transparently. Brands are to blame for not stepping up. And unless the full report states otherwise, Jupiter just threw a scare at both.

But in my opinion, the biggest ones to blame are the social networks themselves. Why is there not a canned CRM solution for brands? What are they waiting for?

My challenge to any "lifestyle" brands out there...

Give us a shot at building your brand's presence on a major social network like MySpace or Facebook. Let us make your brand (and its personality) completely transparent, manage the community, help you listen -- and act. I guarantee that people will be actively speaking and listening with you as long as you're willing to communicate with them and exhibit some "Brand Nudity". Your consumers will appreciate it.

I also guarantee that together we'll prove Jupiter wrong.

Any takers?