How I Earned $75,000 from Networking

Ann Amati is a business consultant in the Seattle area. She’s got a great idea on how to convert her networking activities and connecting into dollars by making her marketing more tangible, predictable, and yes, enjoyable. Her story, in her words, is on Lori Richardson’s Web site.

A friend sent me the article. It reminded me of a tool I created for American Marketing Association members many years ago – and it still works great today. I call it the PVEP – the Personal Value Extraction Plan (you can download a copy of this Excel file from my LinkedIn Profile). It basically goes like this: You already attend many luncheons, seminars, workshops, networking events, and other meetings with the hope of scoring some qualified leads that will move your professional life forward. This tool helps you to identify what you’re getting for those efforts. I used it and found that I could track more than $75,000 in revenue to my business in just one year.

Now, don’t get me wrong on this important point. The PVEP tool is not going to make money for you. You still have to do the work of networking, shaking hands, research, follow up, and creating and delivering value to your business community. This tool simply helps you identify where those dollars can be tracked back to. That way you know if you should renew that membership or continue attending those luncheons. It’s also a great tool for sales people to share back with their managers to justify where they’re spending their time.

For the PVEP tool to be most effective, it’s good to also ensure you set goals and have a plan for your networking efforts. That means you don’t just go to the monthly luncheon for XYZ Association to hear the speaker – you go with a networking plan in place. How many contacts do you want to make? How many meaningful conversations do you think you might have? And, how will you track those contacts back to that event?

The tool is a simple form for a simple process – go places, make friends, create value, harvest rewards, pay it forward. I think this tool combined with Ann Amait’s 20 Nickels Plan will get you off to a great 2009!

-- David Kinard, PCM

Let’s Date First Before You Grab My Wallet

This is the time of year I get a lot of mail from very worthy organizations. Some I’ve heard of before, most I haven’t; some I remember from prior years at this same time. All share a story of deep need teetering on the verge of crisis and the opportunity for me to make a difference. All have no problem asking me for money. Unfortunately, this same experience is being played out across the country, likely in your mailbox as well.

I would like to think that if I had unlimited funds, I would be more than happy to send checks to all these organizations. I could feed the hungry, house the homeless, provide educational kits to children in far away places, and even pay for medical supplies to ease those who needlessly suffer. But I have limited funds and I can’t help everyone. So I make a choice which organization I support. And the decision is pretty easy: those organizations that sought to first understand the motivations I have for giving and created and nurtured a relationship with me over time – they get my money, time, and energy. Every year. The others are like those people in the movies at nightclubs who use bad pick-up lines trying to go from hello to breakfast all in one cheesy opening line.

In his book buyology, author Martin Lindstrom suggests that the noise of advertising and promotion has become just like wallpaper to our brains. We see it but the message doesn’t really register. That exact same thing happens with these requests for help – genuine and important as they may be, they fall on deaf ears because there is no prior relationship to base the request on. But it doesn’t have to be this way.

Whether you’re a non profit or for-profit, I have a new year’s resolution I want you to make. Start in January to establish and build a relationship with your constituents and community. Make regular and non-request contacts with them throughout the year. Keep in touch, tell success stories, treat them like you’re going on a date and are s-l-o-w-l-y falling in love. Woo your community. Then, at the right time, make a small request. Then, once you’ve demonstrated to that participant what you’ve done with their gift to you, say thanks and be quiet. After a period of time – when you’ve been dialoging and sharing – building a deeper relationship, then you can ask for something bigger. Go ahead, pop the question!

Sending me a letter during the holiday season telling me that you’re in need and want money just isn’t going to cut it anymore. In fact, I’ll go so far as to say that it is poor stewardship of the funds you do have. Sure, you’re likely getting a series of donations from that campaign, but I’ll bet your not getting the donations you could if you’d ask people out on a date first.

-- David Kinard, PCM

P.S. If you want to hear more about and from Martin Lindstrom and his book buyology, be sure to listen to Marketing News Radio on February 25, 09. I'll be interviewing him about his book.

A Lot of Talking...But is Anyone Listening?

Over the past two weeks I've had the pleasure of moderating two panel discussions on Beyond Analog: Becoming Part of Today's Digital Marketing World. The Webinars were sponsored by the American Marketing Association as member-only events, and were precursors to the AMA's Mplanet 2009 conference slated for January in Orlando, FL. On the panel were Julie Fleischer of Digitas, Greg Verdino of crayon, llc, and Toby Bloomberg of Bloomberg Marketing.

One of the slides Toby shared had to do with a graphic created by Brian Solis and Jess3 called the Conversation Prism. This masterfully illustrated wheel identifies all the various ways the social Web is integrating itself into peoples' lives...or the other way around. Either way, it is an amazing look at the proliferation of engagement technologies. But with all the ways we have to talk to one another, to review, share, tweet, input, output, post, publish, update, and edit -- the larger question is if anyone is listening, or are we all just talking into the ether.

There are already many places where you can find the number of estimated blogs, Web sites, and users of social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace, Second Life, and cyworld. Needless to say, there are a lot. People are publishing at an amazing rate -- some of it relevant, much of it personal, most of it just noise.

Listening to the presenters, and sorting out the questions from the audience, here are a few items of note I took away from the event:

• The opportunity to add digital to the marketing mix is appealing, but not the first thing a marketer should start doing. Marketers must first ensure what they have to say is relevant and builds relationships. Let the message and the audiences' reception requirements define if the mix has more digital or analog in it.
  
• Digital is not a silver bullet, and it is not a panacea for the insufficiency of an existing marketing program. Many marketers will start a blog, add their company to Facebook, or attempt to find ways to widget and wiki, but unless the marketing program is based on consumer insight, tactics -- whether they are digital or analog -- are just tactics. The responsibility is to customize the marketing program to your audience.
  
• ROI is not as elusive as many marketers think. The problem is not that we can't measure the ROI of digial initiatives. Rather, the problem is that we don't have targeted, specific goals in the first place. Remember, measurement starts at the mission/goal articulation phase of the planning process, not as an after thought at the end of the campaign.


• Waiting is not an option. Many marketers are waiting for someone else to figure out what digital is and isn't before they do something. The fallacy of this approach is that your consumers are already engaging in digital. Waiting simply means that your consumers are building relationships and engaging with those businesses, products, and services that are doing things right now.

-- David Kinard, PCM

How Customers Shop

There has been a ton of research over the years on how consumers make purchase decisions. On my radio show, I've interviewed many experts who offer up just as many explanations ranging from brand loyalty to price sensitivity, and everything in between. However, I've never found anything that replaces the Howard Model of Consumer Decision Making. In its simplicity, it breaks down consumer purchases into three possible categories -- habitual, limited, and extended decision making.

The easiest purchase are those we make from a habitual basis. A recent study by brand guru Erik Joachimsthaller, author of Hidden in Plain Sight, found that when customers went into a convenience store for a salty snack, they avoided the displays up front and went to the part of the store they knew had their desired snack. It was a routine, not a thoughtful choice. This scenario is played out whenever you buy that thing at the store without really looking at what's available, rather you shop for recognition of the package in the spot on the shelves you've seen it before. Purchases of gasoline, toilet paper, or other low-involvement commodities fit into this category.

The next level up is a limited decision-making purchase. This is when we are looking at options, but don't want to put a lot of energy into the purchase. A common scenario for this type of purchase is when considering what movie to watch or which restaurant to go to dinner at with friends. Typically, the purchase price is a bit higher than a habitual purchase, but not always. Price is not always a factor.

The third and most complex level is the extended decision making scenario. For example, this scenario comes into play when you're buying a car, a house, or getting a pet. This situation is very similar to the limited scenario except for what happens afterwards. Have you ever bought a car and then drove away feeling like you should have done this or that? Or on the way home you see your type of car everywhere? This after-purchase dissonance is common and suggests an opportunity for marketers to reinforce the purchase decision with added value and positive messaging.

When marketing, I've often suggested that marketers consider tailoring their communication programs first on where their product or service fits into the decision-making model, and then on integrating communications into the consumer behavior patterns. This creates an opportunity to not only stay relevant based on consumer activity, but also provides a better ROI by linking the communications program to the product value.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Owning Your SERP

When you search for something on the Net -- regardless of the search engine -- the results page is known as your SERP (search engine results page). On that page are listed both organic results (also known as algorithmic results) and paid results where advertisers have paid to show up in your SERP. Regardless of the type of result, savvy marketers will want to own that first page.

So, as an experiment, I, David Kinard, am going to try and make this blog entry hit the top of the search engine results page when people search for David Kinard. Now, there are a lot of David Kinards out there, some are teachers, some work for the IRS, and there is even a David Kinard who I think is the CEO of InFocus. I am not that David Kinard, I am the other one -- the David Kinard whose LinkedIn profile hits the top of the SERP when people search for David Kinard.

Okay, so having my name listed over and over is only the first step in getting a posting to make it to the top ten links on a SERP. There are other things I should do as well. For instance, I should create a David Kinard YouTube channel (which I've done but haven't posted anything up there as of this writing). Having a link in this post to the David Kinard YouTube channel would be a good idea as well. You can find the link here: http://uk.youtube.com/davidkinard.

I would also want to ensure that I created Facebook and MySpace pages for David Kinard. They are popular sites (like LinkedIn) and have a strong influence in your SERP. I created a David Kinard Facebook page and you can find it here: http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Kinard/508369666.

So, with a long entry like this and the instances of David Kinard pretty high so far, the liklihood of this posting making it in the top ten listings on a SERP for David Kinard are good. As long as I keep my David Kinard Facebook page and my David Kinard YouTube channel updated (Google and the other search engines love fresh content and recently updated pages), then I'll have a good chance at starting to own my SERP.

Lastly, another great way to own the SERP is to have your stuff published by other reputable Web sites. You won't see David Kinard listed on any link-sharing sites or what I like to call Link Farms. Those are not highly favored by Google or other engines. Rather, get out there and comment on other people's blogs, make contributions to discussions on forums, and get articles or other thought pieces published on sites. Of course, like me, you'll want to make sure your name is listed. I try to end everything I post on the Web, whether it's my site or someone elses with a -- David Kinard, PCM. The PCM is a credential I earned from the American Marketing Association many years ago, and it adds credibilty to my posts.

But this is just an experiment. There are no hard and fast rules of what you have to do to own a SERP. There are certianly things I could do to get any posting about David Kinard blacklisted but any reputable person who is legitamately trying to do their best should not have to worry about those things. It is said that Google updates their search algorithms about every six months. That means you need to ensure your pages are constantly being updated with fresh and relevant content.

So, today is November 23 and we'll see how long it takes this David Kinard post to land on my SERP. Typically, it can take a few days to several weeks.

The Right Tool for the Job

Likely the one greatest challenge plaguing many companies today is how do they measure the effectiveness of their marketing efforts. One great tool for evaluation, originally developed by George Black, is the CAST system. This analysis model can be applied to any marketing effort, including ads, newsletters, press releases and more. The benefit of evaluating your marketing communications through this tool is an increased awareness of what works, what doesn’t and if you’re using the right tool for the job.

The CAST system evaluates the following measurements by using a simple three option metric: High, Medium, and Low.
• Impact or Impression
• Size of Audience and Reach
• Cost per Contact
• Sales Lead Development
• Message Control
• Timing Control
• Repetitive Contact
• Reaction Speed
• Credibility
• Closing the Sale

You can use the CAST system to determine which of your efforts are actually providing a maximized return on your investment. Plus, it also helps you to identify areas of your marketing and communications that may need further integration with one another for increased effectiveness.

There is a bottom-line benefit to using this type of analysis tool in evaluating your marketing efforts. All too often, our marketing efforts are out-of-date and we don’t know it, or we spending our limited funds on efforts that are not cost effective. By taking the time to assess your marketing efforts and make any necessary adaptations, you help to ensure success.

-- David Kinard, PCM

The Power of a Plan

We create plans all the time: plans to go to dinner and a movie with friends, plans for an exotic vacation, we plan our household budgets and plan for our retirements. In all, every plan we make is an attempt to help us move from where we are to where we want to be in the most convenient, effective and efficient way possible.

Surprisingly, however, many organizations are operating without one of the most important plans they need—a strategic plan. As a critical business development tool, the strategy plan is a keystone to evaluating future growth and providing a roadmap on how to achieve it. It helps us to see our companies from an objective impartial manner and strategize the direction of our efforts.

Strategic plans articulate the past and present, and provide a sense of direction for companies that enables growth from better use of existing resources, and identification of needed new ones. In its simplest form, a good strategy plan will provide an objective view of the world, allowing a company to make informed decisions.

But perhaps the most important value of the strategy plan is its ability to organize a business around the characteristics of its markets. The plan brings to life the true bottom-line value of keeping customers for life and identifies the areas where customer relationships can be enhanced.

One of my favorite tools for strategy building is the Balanced Scorecard™ created by Robert Kaplan and David Norton out of Harvard. The tool asks you to look at the business in terms of four key categories: financial, customer, innovation/infrastructure, and learning and growth. Basically, working from the bottom up you identify what knowledge and skills your teams must have to generate the innovation and systems needed to serve your customers and manage markets, while providing a financial return that satisfies all stakeholders.

Perhaps the most clear and appropriate explanation of the value of a strategy plan can be found in the story of Alice in Wonderland. Alice, who is lost and doesn’t quite know what to do asks the Cheshire Cat for directions.

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?” said Alice.
“That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat.
“I don’t much care where…,” said Alice.
“Then it doesn’t matter which way you do,” said the Cat.

If it doesn’t matter which way your organization goes, then perhaps creating an adaptive and strategic marketing plan is not a good idea. But, if you want a roadmap for success then there’s no better tool than a well developed strategy plan.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Fight Commoditization with Real Value

I just finished reading an amazing book by Erich Joachimsthaller, Hidden in Plain Sight: How to find and execute your company's next big growth strategy. It's a fabulous book and I'll be interviewing Erich on my radio program on Wednesday, November 19 on wsradio.com.

One line in the book hit me like a ton of bricks this weekend while I was reading it.

"We were a highly specialized product turned into a commodity."

To be clear, the line references a German insurance company who by all accounts was a superior product in the marketplace, but because people where shopping on price, none of their elaborate feature sets meant anything. I see this same situation so often; price-driven markets turning complex and highly differentiated products into commodities. So what is a markter to do?

Well, first you should read this book and it will tell you what the insurance company did. But aside from that, you need to ensure your head is not hidden in the sand, hoping that somehow consumers will suddenly wake up to your messaging and branding and agree with you that your products are truly the unique offerings you believe they are. It's never going to happen.

When a product is willingly or unwillingly turned into a commodity by the market and consumer opinion, the simple fact of the matter is that the product has failed to rise above the fray and create a demand ecosystem. In other words, I would say that most products suffering this fate are developing and pushing feature sets that are not relevant, not important, and don't resonate with consumers. That's why they're comparing only on price, because you're just as good, or good enough, as everyone else.

I think Joachimsthaller brings out many excellent ideas in his fresh book and it shoudl be required reading for MBA students. Oh wait, I teach MBA classes, and I assign the books. Guess what folks -- it's now on the reading list!

-- David Kinard, PCM

Hidden in Plain Sight is also the American Marketing Association Foundation’s Berry Book Award winner for the best new book in marketing.

Rule of 7

One thing you learn from being in marketing for any length of time is that there are lots of formulas and rules for doing most anything. Marketers are great at coming up with six easy steps for this, 10 rules for that, and a dynamic 4-part matrix for thinking about anything else.

One of those rule sets I've always like was the Rule of 7. It basically says that if you want your prospect to take action and buy what you're selling, you need to connect with him or her a minimum of seven times in an 18-month period. Then and only then can you reasonably expect the prospect to fully understand what your product benefits are, and take action.

While I've never been able to find any study or research data to suggest that the Rule of 7 is correct, I do like the spirit behind it. In a world where it is said that the average consumer is bombarded by more than 3,000 marketing messages every day, it's easy to see why we need repeat exposures of our messages to gain memorability and traction with our audiences. It also suggests that there is something to be gained with time. Eighteen months is a long time in a marketers world, but it is short in terms of the quality of relationship between people.

I think there are three key take aways from this rule:

1. Think long term. Building a meaningful relationship with a prospect that fosters awareness, remembrance, and positive action takes time. When you approach your marketing communications with an 18-month timeline, they move from hard sell to intimacy. It causes you to think about quality and depth.

2. Frequency of contact is important. When you think of a family member and staying in touch with them, is seven times over a year and a half enough to keep them top of mind? I might suggest that seven is too little, but it depends on the relationship type. Regardless of the ratio of time and contacts, what is important is that you remain on the radar screen of your prospects. This means frequent and relevant communications.

3. Think dialogue, not monologue. This is an obvious point in a Web-enabled, socially-empowered, and technologically-linked marketplace. If those seven communications are just you talking, then there is no relationship being developed, no intimacy being gained, and no relevancy being learned. Make sure that your communications are both monologue and dialogue -- with emphasis on two-way conversations.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Dim Bulb Illuminates Once-Smart Marketers' Failure

My friend Jonathan Salem Baskin, author of the popular blog The Dim Bulb, wrote yesterday about Sprint losing

another 1.3 million subscribers, and turned in a quarterly loss of $326 million. It promised to boost ad spending. Company CEO Dan Hesse said they'd "make the case for competitive pricing." He's been the spokesperson in some of the ads so far.

Baskin suggested in his blog that Sprint go out and steal some customers from AT&T and T-Mobile.

However, I would venture that just stealing customers won't fix Sprint's problems. People are leaving Sprint for the same reasons they will soon leave At&T or any other carrier -- they get bored with the brand and will flock to the next new shiny thing that comes their way. Any investment spent on stealing a customer has a tenuous long-term ROI attached to it.

Rather, I think the problem is much deeper for Sprint -- they've lost their way. They stand for "simply everything" (Sprint's new catchy slogan -- just Google "sprint simply everything to see how pervasive it is) but mean nothing. When they draw a clear line in the sand, gain the courage to do something remarkable and valuable, then I think they'll begin to solve their customer migration issues.

As usual Baskin highlight's the most absurd in big-dumb-company marketing. It is amazing how quickly once-smart people can lose their wits when they enter the corporate board room.

Tough Market Needs Tougher Marketers

It is a comforting thought that if you do your best, work hard, and can attribute results to your efforts, that you will be rewarded and have a good level of security in today's tumultuous economy. However, that comforting thought may not be reality.

Last week I joined the ranks of many qualified marketers who have recently found themselves laid off. After four years with my last employer (almost to the day) I was told my position was being cut. Though I was disappointed and surprised, I wasn't dismayed. I knew that I've spent my time developing a solid resume and network that will -- hopefully -- see me through this employment gap and on to my next role with another company.

What this situation reminds me of, however, is the need for marketers to be tougher than the times they face. It is very easy for marketing professionals to rest on past accomplishments, go at the pace of their competition, or even lag behind in their own learning and education. Rather, marketers need to lock down those new skills on a regular basis, constantly review their work for better ROI opportunities, and innovate their strategies and tactics so that they lead the competition rather than walk alongside or fall behind.

Tough economic times call for tougher marketers -- professionals who have resumes packed full of quantifiable results. Even in the toughest of times, businesses still need good marketing people. In fact, in those tough times they need marketing professionals who have delivered solid results in the past with a brand promise of repeating those results in the future.

If you've found yourself out of a job in these tough times, what are you doing to ensure your marketability is high, and that you're a preferred candidate for the jobs you're applying for?

-- David Kinard, PCM

Two New Ideas -- Review of Wrap Mail and Elevator Pitches

I found two new items on the Web today that really impressed me. The first is simple enough -- go visit it: Elevator Pitches, a service of TechCrunch. This is a site where you can upload your own elevator pitch, have others vote on it/provide feedback, and even review others' pitches. If you're a budding entrepreneur, or a grass-roots marketer needing to generate some buzz, this is an excellent site for you.

While there, I happened up on an idea I think has some solid potential -- Wrap Mail. This is a service that while relatively inexpensive could quickly easily pay for itself. The basic idea is that each email you send out -- or anyone in your company for that matter -- from their client-side machine would be wrapped by clickable and trackable ads about your company. So, while you're emailing out Web site maintenance announcements to your customers, sending customer service emails, or basically any other communication for that matter, the email is wrapped with yoru ads. It's the ultimate in "did you want fries with that?" marketing.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Investor Perspectives on Corporate Brand Strength

As a member of the the American Marketing Association I participate in several active discussion boards on topics around marketing strategy, B:B marketing, and branding. Recently a discussion started around the question if a well-marketed, well-branded corporation carries more merit to to investors, and possibly clouds their views.

I really liked one of the responses contributed by Charlie Henderson, Director of Marketing for Aastra. He noted:

I don't agree that the brand is the strongest intangible asset. It may be the biggest but as we have seen over and over it is an asset whose value can be destroyed in an instant. Sometimes to be rewon (Tylenol) sometimes to be lost forever (Arthur Anderson). The value derives not from the marketing of the brand but the performance and behavior of the company over time. If the day to day exeperiences of the firms clients, constituents and investors meet or exceed the promises made by the brand then value is created. If the experiences are counter to the promises then value is diminished.

Too often marketers approach branding as something that is confined to messaging and visuals. What Charlie emphasizes are two components that are notoriously left out of the marketers' equation: peformance and behavior. When considering performance there are a myriad of metrics to consider, but from an investor's POV they include financial, market penetration/share, share of wallet, and future earnings.

But from a behavior standpoint, the metrics that matter the most (to investors or anyone else for that matter) is the alignment between what is said and what is done. Those companies that are focused and do what they say -- delivering on their promises -- they are the ones that garner a solid reputation, and strengthen the value of their brand.

Charlie goes on to say:

Brand value is won not by ads or mailers but by subsequent actual encounters. Even people who do not shop Wal Mart, FedEx or Lexus accept the value of the brand because they know that if the promises made by the brand were not being delivered the companies would not have been successful or would not have maintained the messaging over so long a time. GM has poor brand value becasue they tend to deliver poorly on the promises made by their advertising and thus change the brand images and messages frequently.

Can good marketing overcome poor execution or bad business models? Sure, but only up to a point and seldom to investors who are looking at the fundamental ability of the company to execute a sound busines model over time.

I think Charlie nailed this point. Investors are wary of companies that shift their focus and waver in terms of their identity. They want to minimize the risk in their investment. However, I've seen investors pour money into brands that may be underperforming financially, but are highly focused and have strong alignment between their brand, their target customers, and their business strategy. They know, as we have seen in many cases, that those companies are more likely to succeed in the long run.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Make News to Become News

I recently sat in a meeting where it was suggested we could do some press releases about a new service and that people would sign up. I couldn't help but stifle a chuckle, and in the spirit of WWJD I thought WWRLD? My friend Richard Laermer, author of Full Frontal PR (2003), and Punk Marketing (2007), and 2011: Trendspotting (2008) is known for saying that PR doesn't happen overnight. There is no just-add-water scenario out there that is long lasting or truly makes an impact. The best way to garner news coverage is to be newsworthy. This got me thinking....

Most CEOs and product managers think their company and it's products are great. And well they should for they are the evangelists. But it is all too common for these people, and even good marketers, to get wrapped up in the wonders and greatness of their company without realizing they are a mile wide and an inch deep. They sit in conference rooms talking about superficialities without recognizing they lack the substance that the media needs to make a story.

Next time you're in one of those meetings -- where some well-meaning CEO or product person says, "Hey, this is big. We should get some press on this" you need to stand up, go to the whiteboard and write this question: What are we specifically doing to make this story newsworthy? From there you can make a quick list of things that you have to compete with such as (and this is what is in the news today): war, political upheavals, apartment fires, murder, scandal, elections, sports upsets, and union strikes. In these areas news is being MADE, it isn't happening.

To MAKE news you have to think in terms of impact, scope, reach, and players. You need to have several winning examples with quantifiable results, you need visuals (things that look good on camera), and you need a spokesperson who can clearly articulate issues and answer questions. It's not enough that you do something -- you have to MAKE what you do newsworthy. Sure, there's likely a small community newspaper or niche Web site that will be happy to publish your story -- but to hit the major media you need to DEMONSTRATE the IMPACT.

And then, once you've done all this, ask yourself if this story has already been covered -- if it's a been there and done that story. If so, get back to the start and find a new way to MAKE news to become news.

Study Shows Effective and Efficient Outgrows Competition

Since 2005 the Lenskold Group has run an annual research study to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of marketing and marketers. The most recent study has just been completed – it’s officially called the 2008 Lenskold Group / Kneebone Marketing ROI and Measurements Study – and I had a chance to talk with Jim Lenskold about the study on my radio show today.

Aside from the startling finding that nearly 91% of marketers do not think they’re really doing an effective and efficient job at measuring marketing ROI, what struck me the most is that 45% of those who said they were highly effective and efficient also noted they were GREATLY OUTGROWING their competitors. This should be a wake up call to any lazy marketers and their lazy companies to get with the program!



The show dives into the success factors of those who are leading the way, but there are plenty of obvious ones that won't surprise you including better access to marketing data and systems that support real-time marketing analysis. Clearly, after listening to this show, any marketer that doesn't realize the benefits of what it means to be a highly effective and highly efficient marketer deserves to get left behind by the competition. Every other major business function has already paved the way and done their work to become lean and data-driven; it's about time marketing did the same.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Managing the Creative Side of Marketing

Someone once said to me that you can't argue opinion. Everyone has one, and everyone is right in their own estimation. Certainly in today's politcal and election drama we see this to be true, except each candidate and party likes to weave their version of the facts into the mix, attempting to make their opinions sound more credible.

I see this happen all the time when it comes to marketing creative. I've recently heard statements using keywords like "industry standard" and "design conventions" in an attempt to justify an opinion. I keep asking, though, where are those standards and conventions written down? No one has been able to show me yet.

Sure, there are many places I've been told to go (pun intended), but for the most part those sources have just turned out to be more opinions citing these so-called conventions and standards. I think what happens is that we hear these phrases enough by people we think should know better, and begin to believe them ourselves. Or, worse yet, we see it one place and assume that is the only and right way to do it.

When it comes to managing the creative side of marketing, I've found two things to be true. HiPPO usually wins out (that's the Highest Paid Person's Opinion). When that doesn't happen, and common sense rules the day, then creative is judged on the following criteria:

1. How will our target audience interpret the creative?
2. How well does this creative enhance our ability to get our target audience to think, feel, and then act in the way we want them to?
3. Does the creative fit into the brand perception and associations our audience has of us?
4. How much are the answers to the previous questions colluded by our own personal preference or opinion?

Creative isn't about us. It's about the target audience. It's about relevance. It's about importance. It's about making sure we move forward, not just stand still or go backwards.

-- David Kinard, PCM

What are the Essential Characteristics of a Disruptive Product or Service?

I posed this question in an earlier blog (see September 30 post) and said I'd do more research on the subject. After asking the question to groups on LinkedIn, I found that two main sources of information were consistent: 1) check the wikipedia definition on the subject; and 2) Clayton Christensen basically is the father of the idea.

From the wiki definition:

A disruptive technology or disruptive innovation is a term describing a technological innovation, product, or service that uses a "disruptive" strategy, rather than an "evolutionary" or "sustaining" strategy, to overturn the existing dominant technologies or status quo products in a market. Disruptive innovations can be broadly classified into low-end and new-market disruptive innovations.

By contrast, a "revolutionary technology" introduces products with highly improved new features into the market. This is the innovation that most often replaces the incumbent [automobile - horse drawn vehicle]. In addition, a "sustaining technology or innovation" improves product performance of established products. Sustaining technologies are often incremental; however, they can also be radical or discontinuous.

Other than one angry commenter on LinkedIn (go figure), there were a few interesting comments. Particularly, I liked Jody Wilson's comment about Step - Stretch - Leap.

Surprisingly, however, what I didn't find (even after some serious googling) was a laundry list to check against if you wanted to build a disruptive product or service. What this confirmed for me is that the characteristic of disruptive is nothing that can be planned or programmed. Rather it is a whole combination of elements working together at the right time and in the right ways that produces a disruptive nature.

Ahh, the beauty of synergy -- where one plus one equals three or more.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Delivering Customer Value

One of my friends got laid off today -- the economy is hitting people and companies hard. He took it well and in stride, figuring now was his opportunity to do some consulting. We chatted about how to best position himself and it reminded me of the importance of thinking in terms of delivered customer value.

In business we talk about customer value all the time. But what rarely happens is the quantifiable approach to seeing what we actually deliver. (Not to mention the fact that often what we think of as value is merely functionality and features to the customer.) This formula, originally created by marketing sage Philip Kotler, is a foundational approach to determining and delivering customer value.

The formula is easy -- each item is worth five points for a total of 20 potential points of value and cost. From a customer perspective, rate each item between 0 (zero) and five. Do the simple math of addition and subtraction and you can figure your delivered value. Now, complete the exercise with your competition in mind -- again from the customer's perspective. If you can't be objective, go out there and find some customers to do this for you. It's bare naked truth time!!

Once you have your delivered value score, well, then the real work begins to increase value and reduce costs.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Manage the Brand First, then the Product

In some recent discussions with a fellow marketer, we talked about the difference between brand management and product management. He being a staunch product guy came at the discussion from a technical and functional point of view. Myself, being more concerned about the experience, came at it from a more customer-centric perspective.

Certainly, both perspectives and their corresponding activities are important. Each suggests necessary objectives to move closer to company goals. But what struck me is where you start. I think it is from the brand, and here's why.

Traditional product management starts from technological possibilities which lead to concept generation, selection, and design. A more brand-centric approach requires you to first examine the value customers receive from using your products, their expectatations and desires, and what needs they have (known or unknown). This point of genesis requires, however, the company to be more customer attuned rather than engineering focused.

When you manage the brand first, you start with a business review: marketplace standing, competition, distribution, and the customer perspective (whether present customers, competitive, or emerging). Then, if you weave into the discussion the technological possibilities and map them to potential product use and product potential, your perspective is outwardly-focused when selecting options and designing functionality.

Sure, this approach isn't for everyone or every company...just those that want to move beyond vanilla and mediocre into the remarkable.

-- David Kinard, PCM

Customer Wait Times -- How Long is Too Long?

If you’re like me, you hate to wait in lines at the store, or too long for service at a restaurant. These long check out lines, or not enough employees available to answer your questions, it seems like we as customers are often getting the short end of the stick. What impact does that have on a business – when customers are asked to wait? Will a long wait time even cost you business? And if so, how long is too long to wait? We talked about this and more in today's Marketing News Radio broadcast.

On the program today to look into this issue of how long customers expect to wait for service was Tom Krause – he’s the director of strategic consulting for Martiz Research Retail Group. His team just completed a study of more than 1400 American consumers to see what their expectations and limits are when it comes to waiting around.

I'll admit I was surprised by what I heard. For the most part, Americans aren't that bothered by having to wait in lines. Perhaps we accept it as part of the cost of doing business someplace. And, to our credit, we are rather forgiving when wait times are too long if the employee is courteous, genuinely sorry for the inconvenience, and smiles.

But there is a dark side to an extended wait time. Fully 80% of the respondants walked out of a restaurant, 40% left a bank, and 50% walked out of a convenience store because the wait was too long. And for those who walked out -- 30% of them never went back.

Sure, long waits are inevitable. An unexpected rush of customers can easily overwhelm a manager's best attempts at staffing. Krause offered up a list of NO COST things an employee can do to minimize negative impacts of long wait times and even some suggestions for what retailers might do this holiday season to preclude frustrations before they happen.

Experts from Maritz Research are regular guests on this show and today was no exception to the interesting topics and practical value they bring. Be sure to check the show archives for other radio programs with Martiz covering customer experience and customer engagement practices.

-- David Kinard, PCM