Comments on: The Unfinished Marketing Revolution http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/#utm_source=feed&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=feed At the Crossroads of Media, Marketing and Technology... Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:18:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Greg http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-3349 Greg Mon, 10 May 2010 08:25:37 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-3349 Bob, Lots of good points. Thanks. I would also add that there is often a numbers and math are often confused. As I wrote before, <a href="http://www.digitaltonto.com/2009/less-numbers-more-math/" rel="nofollow">it's more math that we need, not more numbers</a>. But you're right. Math shouldn't be used as a substitute for intuition. Good decision making requires both. - Greg Bob,

Lots of good points. Thanks.

I would also add that there is often a numbers and math are often confused. As I wrote before, it’s more math that we need, not more numbers.

But you’re right. Math shouldn’t be used as a substitute for intuition. Good decision making requires both.
- Greg

]]> By: Bob Lewis http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-3346 Bob Lewis Mon, 10 May 2010 07:50:38 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-3346 Some good points here. In my (considerable) experience most CEO's & advertising vice presidents are indeed mathematically illiterate. (They should at least know when a market research company is trying to sell them a rubbish survey that challenges the basics of statistical sampling certainty.) What worries me is the 'geekist tendency' that creeps in occasionally - that computers can somehow replace human imagination and insight so that we can all learn to press the right buttons in order to get the right answers and spend the afternoon relaxing with our favourite extreme sport. Technology has brought many good things but its greatest danger is that it is too often used to impress clients, CEOs, etc. rather than getting to the heart of problems. There's an old saying that market research "is used much as a drunk uses a lamp post - more for support than illumination." Much the same accusation can be levelled at many high-tech computed 'solutions'. What happened to the GIGO principal for heaven's sake? We need to remind ourselves of it more today than back in the stone age of computer technology. Funky graphics and a weasel vocabulary can hide fundamental errors which create 'information' houses of cards. And finally, electronic 'solutions' are based on logic. Year one Human Behaviour makes it clear that humans hardly ever behave logically for any sustained time period. 'Else, why are the techno-geek designed 'help lines' of just about every big corporation universally despised and hated. Do their CEOs ever try using them? No, because the numbers - sorry the Metrics - show they're working just fine. Another glowing paragraph in the Annual Report - 'millions of calls an hour answered within 30''. (And another 100 000 pissed off clients, because if there has to be a choice -and there usually is - people want quality before speed in having their problems solved.) ETC. Some good points here. In my (considerable) experience most CEO’s & advertising vice presidents are indeed mathematically illiterate. (They should at least know when a market research company is trying to sell them a rubbish survey that challenges the basics of statistical sampling certainty.)

What worries me is the ‘geekist tendency’ that creeps in occasionally – that computers can somehow replace human imagination and insight so that we can all learn to press the right buttons in order to get the right answers and spend the afternoon relaxing with our favourite extreme sport.

Technology has brought many good things but its greatest danger is that it is too often used to impress clients, CEOs, etc. rather than getting to the heart of problems. There’s an old saying that market research “is used much as a drunk uses a lamp post – more for support than illumination.”

Much the same accusation can be levelled at many high-tech computed ‘solutions’. What happened to the GIGO principal for heaven’s sake? We need to remind ourselves of it more today than back in the stone age of computer technology. Funky graphics and a weasel vocabulary can hide fundamental errors which create ‘information’ houses of cards.

And finally, electronic ‘solutions’ are based on logic. Year one Human Behaviour makes it clear that humans hardly ever behave logically for any sustained time period. ‘Else, why are the techno-geek designed ‘help lines’ of just about every big corporation universally despised and hated. Do their CEOs ever try using them? No, because the numbers – sorry the Metrics – show they’re working just fine. Another glowing paragraph in the Annual Report – ‘millions of calls an hour answered within 30”. (And another 100 000 pissed off clients, because if there has to be a choice -and there usually is – people want quality before speed in having their problems solved.)

ETC.

]]> By: Greg http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2786 Greg Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:32:35 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2786 Scott, Interesting perspective. Thanks. - Greg Scott,

Interesting perspective. Thanks.

- Greg

]]> By: Scott Cone http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2782 Scott Cone Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:50:59 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2782 I think this offers a good perspective and having been a part of the marketing services industry for some time now, I can say I think there's a whole unspoken but well understood symbiotic relationship between many marketers and their agency partners. The advertising industrial complex still exists as it has for the last 100 years primarily because clients are still supporting it, even if it is somewhat diminished. For all the tough talk from clients about the system no longer working at advertising conferences they still spend an inordinate amount of the marketing budget on traditional advertising when the evidence is abundant that the audience hates advertising but loves engaging content. Why? 1. It's easier to manage than the new digital communication and marketing. 2. Clients don't have the talent in house to understand what needs to be done and their big agency partners don't either and they're in no position to push for something better. 3. Most marketing is still generated against the outdated notion of the purchase funnel. McKinsey released landmark research last year showing this was an antiquated approach to marketing and that in the active evaluation stage of the purchase process, which looks more like a feedback loop than a funnel, 2/3rds of the marketing consumers use to make their buying decisions, in a number of categories, comes from other consumers! 4. Clients, for all their talk about the importance of integration, are still siloed in their approach to budget allocation, divving up the marketing pie into functional slices, which in turn encourages the hiring of disparate agencies to manage all these different slices. 5. Clients are enamored with the perks...the glamor of seeing their results on TV or in a magazine, going on the production shoots, staying at Shutter, hanging with celebrities, getting the free tickets. You may laugh but you can't underestimate the irrational decision making component to the continued spend on antiquated marketing practices in the face of evidence they are a source of diminishing returns. Brands and marketing services providers have a golden opportunity to leverage the new realities of the empowered consumer, who pulls terabytes of content to them daily. To do this, several changes must occur in the industry, in addition to the incorporation of science to a practice that's been mainly art. Measurement and proving ROI are givens from this point out. So, I assume these have to be a part of any marketing solution. And, by measurement, I'm referring not to eyeballs but to actual behavior that leads to purchase and recommendation. We see three distinct components to a successful marketing approach for the new realities: First, the marketing-agency-media ecosystem will need to work together to create CONTENT consumers really want to pull to them. Second, CONTEXT, as you correctly point out, is as important as CONTENT. Identifying where consumers want to access content is not hard...it's online, on their mobile devices, in store and through compelling, real world experiences. The rules of human story telling still apply...you have to have an interesting tale to tell. Advertising has rarely been interesting. To this point, our final criteria is this: Orchestration is more important than integration. Some marketers have taken the very intellectually ignorant or lazy approach that integration means "the same thing everywhere". Nothing could be more boring. Imagine going to a symphony concert where every musician played the same note on their instrument at the same time. Yet, this is how some marketers approach the layering of their communication across multiple touch points. Rather, we believe new layers of interest and information need to be discoverable across different touch points at different points of time during a campaign or marketing initiative. My final point is that marketing services providers have business models that are not currently set up to foster and reward this kind of innovation. They have large staffs and much overhead. They must feed the beast. We believe a new kind of marketing services firm is poised to emerge...one that has a small team of strategy and business people to help create the new content-centric communication and then an on-demand team deployment system, so the work can get done better, faster and cheaper. Let me know your thoughts on these ideas. I think this offers a good perspective and having been a part of the marketing services industry for some time now, I can say I think there’s a whole unspoken but well understood symbiotic relationship between many marketers and their agency partners. The advertising industrial complex still exists as it has for the last 100 years primarily because clients are still supporting it, even if it is somewhat diminished. For all the tough talk from clients about the system no longer working at advertising conferences they still spend an inordinate amount of the marketing budget on traditional advertising when the evidence is abundant that the audience hates advertising but loves engaging content. Why? 1. It’s easier to manage than the new digital communication and marketing. 2. Clients don’t have the talent in house to understand what needs to be done and their big agency partners don’t either and they’re in no position to push for something better. 3. Most marketing is still generated against the outdated notion of the purchase funnel. McKinsey released landmark research last year showing this was an antiquated approach to marketing and that in the active evaluation stage of the purchase process, which looks more like a feedback loop than a funnel, 2/3rds of the marketing consumers use to make their buying decisions, in a number of categories, comes from other consumers! 4. Clients, for all their talk about the importance of integration, are still siloed in their approach to budget allocation, divving up the marketing pie into functional slices, which in turn encourages the hiring of disparate agencies to manage all these different slices. 5. Clients are enamored with the perks…the glamor of seeing their results on TV or in a magazine, going on the production shoots, staying at Shutter, hanging with celebrities, getting the free tickets. You may laugh but you can’t underestimate the irrational decision making component to the continued spend on antiquated marketing practices in the face of evidence they are a source of diminishing returns. Brands and marketing services providers have a golden opportunity to leverage the new realities of the empowered consumer, who pulls terabytes of content to them daily. To do this, several changes must occur in the industry, in addition to the incorporation of science to a practice that’s been mainly art. Measurement and proving ROI are givens from this point out. So, I assume these have to be a part of any marketing solution. And, by measurement, I’m referring not to eyeballs but to actual behavior that leads to purchase and recommendation. We see three distinct components to a successful marketing approach for the new realities: First, the marketing-agency-media ecosystem will need to work together to create CONTENT consumers really want to pull to them. Second, CONTEXT, as you correctly point out, is as important as CONTENT. Identifying where consumers want to access content is not hard…it’s online, on their mobile devices, in store and through compelling, real world experiences. The rules of human story telling still apply…you have to have an interesting tale to tell. Advertising has rarely been interesting. To this point, our final criteria is this: Orchestration is more important than integration. Some marketers have taken the very intellectually ignorant or lazy approach that integration means “the same thing everywhere”. Nothing could be more boring. Imagine going to a symphony concert where every musician played the same note on their instrument at the same time. Yet, this is how some marketers approach the layering of their communication across multiple touch points. Rather, we believe new layers of interest and information need to be discoverable across different touch points at different points of time during a campaign or marketing initiative. My final point is that marketing services providers have business models that are not currently set up to foster and reward this kind of innovation. They have large staffs and much overhead. They must feed the beast. We believe a new kind of marketing services firm is poised to emerge…one that has a small team of strategy and business people to help create the new content-centric communication and then an on-demand team deployment system, so the work can get done better, faster and cheaper. Let me know your thoughts on these ideas.

]]> By: Greg http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2716 Greg Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:44:54 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2716 Stan, Wherever they go they shift the balance. Marketing services companies used to be the center of knowledge. However, that has shifted to clients and suppliers. It's both a function of the fact that big clients have invested heavily in training and technology and the rise of the web as an advertising medium as well as the segmentation of the advertising industry. What used to be made up of full service agencies that had to deliver a holistic approach is now a collection of specialist companies that concentrate on a particular set of skills. - Greg Stan,

Wherever they go they shift the balance. Marketing services companies used to be the center of knowledge. However, that has shifted to clients and suppliers.

It’s both a function of the fact that big clients have invested heavily in training and technology and the rise of the web as an advertising medium as well as the segmentation of the advertising industry. What used to be made up of full service agencies that had to deliver a holistic approach is now a collection of specialist companies that concentrate on a particular set of skills.

- Greg

]]> By: Stan Yanakiev http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2712 Stan Yanakiev Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:09:08 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2712 Greg, Applying quants to which areas of the marketing industry do you think is likely to most definitely "shift the center of gravity" and bridge the gap to Silicon Valley? Stan Greg,

Applying quants to which areas of the marketing industry do you think is likely to most definitely “shift the center of gravity” and bridge the gap to Silicon Valley?

Stan

]]> By: Greg http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2709 Greg Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:47:57 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2709 Mike, Thanks. Lots of good points, many of which apply to the world of finance as well. However, there is no question that Google has added efficiencies to the direct response market, although Patrick Housel's remarks do still apply to the display market. It should also be mentioned, that the quants are rarely the ones overselling their models (Scholes and Merton notwithstanding). They know the limitations. - Greg Mike,

Thanks. Lots of good points, many of which apply to the world of finance as well.

However, there is no question that Google has added efficiencies to the direct response market, although Patrick Housel’s remarks do still apply to the display market. It should also be mentioned, that the quants are rarely the ones overselling their models (Scholes and Merton notwithstanding). They know the limitations.

- Greg

]]> By: Mike Lynn http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2707 Mike Lynn Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:09:40 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2707 Greg, as always, a stimulating and insightful perspective and discussion. But where is the discussion of human behavior? After almost 40 yrs in the business, while the computing power has changed the speed and accuracy of eyeball/ear/body counts, I am no more confident now than I was when I started in 1972 that we are actually reaching the right people at the right time with the right message. In fact, I believe the quants are to blame for mesmerizing us all with their clicks and time spent metrics which to me are no more valuable or meaningful than the old Eyes On research (ever read this study?)or Percy Meter (an insight into viewing behaviors that was rejected by the industry because it provided evidence of what peoiple really did during commerical breaks). A gentleman named Gus Premier (head of SC Johnson marketing in the0s-80s)championed a behavioral approach way back then based on research and observation re:real people under real circumstances. Can't get into his work now but he was ahead of his time. Anyway, I ramble. One last note. I was at a Chicago Internet Marketing Assoc dinner a while back and Patrick Hounsell of Razorfish was on a panel discussing the wonderful new world of online metrics. After several long winded speeches about the magic of simply following clicks and all the other digital metrics, Patrick turned to the panel members and asked (not a direct quote) "But do you have any idea of what was motivating them to click on your ads? Do you know if they were having a delayed reaction to other messages or stimulii? Don't you want to know what was behind the clicks? If you knew this, you could refine and duplicate the experience." Not one of the panel members responded. They didn't seem to understand. PAtrick did/does and I think Razorfish gets it. Thanks again for great piece. Greg, as always, a stimulating and insightful perspective and discussion. But where is the discussion of human behavior? After almost 40 yrs in the business, while the computing power has changed the speed and accuracy of eyeball/ear/body counts, I am no more confident now than I was when I started in 1972 that we are actually reaching the right people at the right time with the right message. In fact, I believe the quants are to blame for mesmerizing us all with their clicks and time spent metrics which to me are no more valuable or meaningful than the old Eyes On research (ever read this study?)or Percy Meter (an insight into viewing behaviors that was rejected by the industry because it provided evidence of what peoiple really did during commerical breaks).

A gentleman named Gus Premier (head of SC Johnson marketing in the0s-80s)championed a behavioral approach way back then based on research and observation re:real people under real circumstances. Can’t get into his work now but he was ahead of his time.

Anyway, I ramble.

One last note. I was at a Chicago Internet Marketing Assoc dinner a while back and Patrick Hounsell of Razorfish was on a panel discussing the wonderful new world of online metrics. After several long winded speeches about the magic of simply following clicks and all the other digital metrics, Patrick turned to the panel members and asked (not a direct quote) “But do you have any idea of what was motivating them to click on your ads? Do you know if they were having a delayed reaction to other messages or stimulii? Don’t you want to know what was behind the clicks? If you knew this, you could refine and duplicate the experience.” Not one of the panel members responded. They didn’t seem to understand.

PAtrick did/does and I think Razorfish gets it.

Thanks again for great piece.

]]> By: Stan http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2690 Stan Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:40:18 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2690 Greg, The point about shifting the center of gravity by using technology is clear. I guess I went a bit off topic. Greg,

The point about shifting the center of gravity by using technology is clear. I guess I went a bit off topic.

]]> By: Greg http://www.digitaltonto.com/2010/the-unfinished-marketing-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-2689 Greg Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:50:59 +0000 http://www.digitaltonto.com/?p=1432#comment-2689 Stan, As always, thanks for your input. For sure, the quants are out there, but as Greg mentioned, where they end up may shift the center of gravity. The global agency networks centered in New York and London are at a demonstrable disadvantage to Silicon Valley. They understand the problem and a recruiting talent, but integrating it into daily operations is another matter. - Greg Stan,

As always, thanks for your input.

For sure, the quants are out there, but as Greg mentioned, where they end up may shift the center of gravity. The global agency networks centered in New York and London are at a demonstrable disadvantage to Silicon Valley.

They understand the problem and a recruiting talent, but integrating it into daily operations is another matter.

- Greg

]]>