Blog

The multifarious and marginally edited ramblings of CTP’s human capital. i.e., Our thoughts.

Posts Tagged ‘advertising’

It ain’t rocket science… or is it?

Thursday, June 2nd, 2011

“Oh, so you’re in advertising? That must be kinda scary… with the web killing newspapers…and radio…and television…and all this social media stuff… Must be hard to keep up…How do agencies even stay in business?”

I hear a variation on this theme at almost every cocktail party, and the logic always amuses me. Yes, things move fast in our business. And they’ve moved exponentially faster each day since the first web banner ad was posted back in 1994. Does that mean technological innovation will somehow surpass our ability to harness it to the benefit of our clients and their brands? Heck no. In fact, every innovation – from a small tweak on an existing technology to a major breakthrough – is a huge opportunity for an agency like ours to break new ground on behalf of clients. As an industry, we’re far from wanting to slow things down. In fact we’re happy to see them speed up.

The truth is we’re still doing what we’ve been doing since the first advertising agencies opened their doors – we’re creating relationships between our clients’ brands and the people they’re intended for. Sure, the nature and pace of that relationship has evolved dramatically since the days when soap operas were literally sponsored by soap companies. But that evolution has benefitted both the brand and the consumer. For the brand, the new modes of communication allow them to present themselves in a much richer, more dimensional way to an audience who has, in many cases, requested the relationship. And for consumers, new tools such as Twitter and Facebook have empowered them with the ability to actually talk back and shape brands, let them know what they like or don’t like, take them to task or praise them to the masses.

It would be completely counterproductive for people in our profession to be intimidated by new developments in media and technology. Imagine a physicist toiling away in a lab on a new rocket propulsion system. Now imagine him refusing to read, understand and apply the latest work being done by other scientists in the field.  He’d be missing out on a big leg up, right? The same is true of innovations that impact our business. If we work to understand and employ the latest technologies for our clients, it can only make our work more effective and valued. It’s not rocket science. But sometimes it feels like it.

When failure is an option

Wednesday, May 4th, 2011

As a handicapper, part of Joe Drape’s job is to predict the winner of the Kentucky Derby.

Every year.

In the New York Times.

Drape, an award-winning sports writer for the Times, knows the horse racing industry inside and out. Joe knows about breeding a horse. Joe knows about evaluating track conditions. Joe knows more about the gastrointestinal intricacies of an equine and their potential effects on the outcome of a race than most people. Joe knows horse racing. But since picking Monarchos to win in 2001, he is coming up on a decade long losing streak. O-fer. Donut.

So, ok. It’s not an ideal situation for anyone to go that long without being right, let alone someone who does this for a living. (Did I mention it was the New York Times with its 900,000 daily circulation?) We all know that being “right” is valued. But as I was reading the article it occurred to me – isn’t there also a value in being willing to sometimes be wrong?

What does that have to do with marketing? Everything. Because the only way to get anything right, including advertising, marketing and PR endeavors, is to try and be willing to fail sometimes along the way.

No, it isn’t good for your ego. No, it isn’t always a streamlined process. No, it might not be cost-effective in the short term, although I would argue that learning from your mistakes can be very cost effective in the long run. But the fact of the matter is – you have to be willing to try things, even if it means sometimes being wrong. If you want to be successful, that’s just the way it is.

As a result of his willingness to sometimes be wrong I would argue that along the way Joe has been an advocate for horse racing, made a career out of following his passion & sharing it with millions of readers and learned the value in being the one who is willing to stick your neck out sometimes.

As I look back at the clients I have worked with, the ones that were successful were the clients that, among other things, were OK when there was an idea that didn’t work. Not only were they OK with it, they actually VALUED it. Because they knew there was a value to the process. There is an upside in “trying” as much as in “succeeding.”

But before this becomes a debate about mediocrity – hear me out. Because as with most things in life, there is a right way and a wrong way to go about failing.

1)    Do Your Homework. Do your research; engage consumers; ask your co-workers about their experiences. Make sure you have good reasons for trying something and make sure that when you look back, you will see that you were at least headed in the right direction. Then go for it.

2)    Be Methodical. Once you decide to go for it, make sure you think of everything and then force yourself to stop. Take a moment. And think about what else you haven’t thought about. An idea that doesn’t work happens. But falling flat on your face because you didn’t want to do the little things it took to be prepared is not OK. Regardless of the outcome.

3)    Be Self-Critical. Chronicle every part of the process and when it is done be willing to take the time to gather the team and have an honest conversation about what worked and what didn’t. Learn from it. What didn’t you account for? What took longer than you expected? What skill sets was your team missing? What questions should you have asked?

As Joe Drape points out, it’s human nature to want to be right. But that doesn’t mean you need to be afraid of being wrong. Doing the steps above will set you up to have the best possible outcome. And if that doesn’t happen, the second best possible outcome is to understand why.

I’m not suggesting that we don’t strive for success. Quite the opposite. I believe that greater success is achievable if we leave some room for the possibility of failure. Because when done right, being willing to be wrong allows you to learn about your business, your customers and, most importantly, how to do it better next time.

We need to be OK with asking questions. We need to be comfortable not knowing all of the answers. We need to be willing to create an environment where “trying” is just as valued as “succeeding”.

Then we need to be willing to go forth – and sometimes –fail.

 

 

 

Good things happen when brands unite

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011

I recently found myself dreaming about bringing two brands together. My wife was tapping away on her iPad as I was driving along unfamiliar roads during a family vacation. She had access to information that I wanted on the dash. Reading espn.com, watching “Modern Family” episodes or going through email doesn’t make sense at 75 MPH. But  live traffic updates, route options, extensive music playlists?  It got me wondering about which automaker would make a good partner for Apple? At that moment I wished for a Honda-Apple marriage. A few years ago there was talk that it would team up with Mercedes. It never happened. Is it the earthy Subaru set?  Lexus? Audi? Volvo?

Automakers continue to embrace relationships with other brands to improve their vehicle experience. Toyota and Microsoft this month announced a partnership to do just what I dreamed about driving along the Shenandoah Valley.  Or they do it to put their cars in front of consumers, like Acura is planning to do for the first time with a major motion picture.

But what if you’re not selling cars, motion pictures or technology? What makes a smart partnership?

Regardless of your industry or marketing budget there is another company that would make an ideal partner. They could improve your customers’ user experience or help introduce your product to a new audience. The ideal partner has credibility, shares some of your personality traits and values, and owns both an established voice and loyal audience.  Ultimately, you are best served when both partners can achieve something greater than a pay-for-play sponsorship.

A committed relationship builds incentive for both organizations, whether matching a company with a cause or bringing together two brands. You have to be on the same page with all tenets of the relationship for it to bring real value.  And be careful not to take on too many partners. As a CTP colleague points out, “Don’t go so overboard in sticking your name on other people’s stuff so much so that it eventually becomes meaningless to consumers and worthless to prospective partners. Like Swarovski.”

When done right, though, partnerships benefit both companies and the consumer.

Now if we can only get Cold Stone, Five Guys and JetBlue in the same room.

Cookies, privacy and Germany: The future of web stats

Friday, February 11th, 2011

Statistics are a boon to online advertising. They allow us to gauge the effectiveness of campaigns, diagnose issues with content and answer the big question, “How popular is my site?” Without statistics, site owners (and advertisers) would be blind.

Unfortunately, there is a growing movement that wants statistics tracking to be an opt-in/opt-out affair for users. Privacy is the cited concern, and much of this backlash has to do with recent innovations in user tracking technology.

If, for instance, you visit an online store and search for “winter gloves,” there is a good chance that after you leave that site you’ll begin seeing ads featuring winter gloves or things people-who-shop-for-winter-gloves-also-like on other, seemingly unrelated sites.

This is thanks to the prevalence of third-party advertising networks that save information on your computer called a “cookie” each time you visit a site (not the delicious kind, but we’re hungry, so we included a picture).

The ad networks use these cookies to figure out where you’ve been, which in turn allows them to serve you ads based on your browsing history.

Kinda cool? Yes. Kinda creepy? Yes.

A much more benign form of web tracking is on-site analytics. This type of analytics allows site owners to see how users behave on their website but doesn’t track them after they’ve left the site.

Right now, the only way to avoid cookie-based tracking is to manually disable Javascript in you browser and delete your cookies every time you leave a website. Sounds fun?

Instead of this, privacy advocates are suggesting an “opt-out” feature available right in the browser. Activating it would tell advertisers and analytics trackers not to follow you. The effectiveness of this of course relies on the complicity of the ad networks to obey the request.

Germany has recently taken a legal stance against web analytics providers, citing Google Analytics in particular. The German government has deemed that Google is not doing enough to protect the privacy of its citizens and is threatening to issue fines against Germain companies who use Google’s analytics tool on their websites. This leaves many German web companies with few options.

Hopefully, privacy advocates, advertisers and browser developers can reach a compromise on this issue. Both sides have valid concerns, but it shouldn’t escalate to the point where we can’t run legitimate, anonymous analytics on our sites.

What do you think? Will visitors to your site opt-out of being tracked if given the choice?

Super Bowl XLV’s battle of the brands

Monday, February 7th, 2011

The Monday after Super Bowl Sunday brings a sigh of relief for some brands, a scramble to pick up the pieces for others. The media’s abuzz with acclaim for those who delivered a creative punch, and criticism for those who fell short. Grant Pace takes a look back at last night’s much anticipated Super Bowl XLV commercials:

Overall the 2011 ad lineup was strong. I thought our industry brought their A-game.  And I believe we only had one hit in the crotch gag, so perhaps we are evolving.

The automaker that stood out was Chrysler. The Born of Fire 2:00 Anthem was inspired work. A very unique take on an automotive message, and one that stood out on a good day for the automakers. This spot didn’t sell a car, or even a company. It was a paen to Detroit. And it was heard loud and clear.

Ad that left me going, “Huh?” was Audi’s Kenny G spot. I found it confusing, and trying way too hard to make me hate old people.

Award for most creative goes to Coke’s fire breathing dragon. Go watch this again. The animation is amazing, the story fun. I had to laugh that the movie promo for Thor followed shortly after, and was lame in comparison.

Funniest ad goes to VW’s Darth Vader. The kid’s performance is classic. A 10.

The most disappointing ad was Groupon. A company people love. A list director (Christopher Guest). World’ largest viewing audience. But to borrow a term from Sarah Palin, “WTF?” I would love to see the creative brief that led to these ads. Hmm, let’s mock some great causes, using some B list celebs, to promote how we find some great deals on local goods. Disaster.

E-Trade’s talking babies are funnier once you have had a kid. The fact they were “interviewed” in the pregame may mean we are on shark jumping territory.

Agencies should learn from Lipton’s Brisk Tea. Namely, if you are using a celebrity endorser, even one in Claymation form, be sure they are not also in another, more memorable ad in the same game. No one is talking about Eminem’s spot for them today, and that’s too bad because it was pretty good.

Next year I want to see The KC Chiefs in the big game. Not as advertisers. As AFC Champions.

Back to Top

© 2012 Conover Tuttle Pace. All Rights Reserved.