CK's Blog

Shutting up is such a great strategy (who'da thunk it?)

I've written a lot on listening. In fact, my number one piece of advice to any marketer, be it for online or offline efforts...whether focused on BtoB or BtoC audiences...in entertainment, electronics, energy or other industries...has been, and will always be, this shiny gem:

Listen to your markets, it's amazing what they'll teach you (if you let them).

You see, listening guards against our number one issue as marketers (that issue would be 'myopia'). And while we don't have a pill to cure myopia, processes dedicated to listening help very, very much.

Then came social media.

But that practice didn't go away.

Nope, it just became that much easier because it gave us the ability to create new listening processes--and it gave us the opportunity on a silver platter. For free. Yep, all of this rich information and insights actively (and freely!) circulating around us, all of it just waiting for smart marketers to do what they do best: turning market information into actionable marketing strategies.

After all, the true value proposition of social media for companies is that it gives them the ability to identify new markets, new opportunities, potential risks and needed improvements.

So, having penned about the practice of leading by listening several times now, I went one further-- and created a downloadable PDF on why listening processes are needed, what to listen for, and why. It's helpful for my prospects, clients and colleagues. And since I'm sharing it with them, I want to share it with you (it's accessible here).

Hey, thanks for listening to me...and most especially, for listening to them.

As it turns out, I did get coal for x-mas. Or, "Why companies should read blogs (as told for the zillionth time, even on x-mas day ;-)."

So I did get coal in my stocking this year. Actually, it's all I got in my stocking. (Because I got a new stocking along with it!)

Flash back a couple weeks ago and I was discussing an energy campaign I found effective. I mainly found it to be a "good example" because it didn't involve telling consumers that they needed to share in figuring out the energy crisis solution (Are we expecting consumers to build greenhouses while they're trying like mad just to keep their growing debt down? This is the wrong message, Chevron). Nor did they take Dow's approach that it takes hydrogen + oxygen to make water and, ergo, somehow they're very human now (to be sure, most everyone has lauded Dow's campaign so I'm the crazy there).

Nope, I appreciated this coal initiative because it's simple and fun, one could even rightly say 'campy' (spot is here) and so I wrote on it.

And in that post I also recommended a fun holiday campaign for them that aligned with their platform and the current holiday season, and... they took me up on it! Then they also overnighted this stocking and piece of coal to me right before x-mas (the "coal" is actually a big piece of chocolate, smart on their part, eh?).

My idea was this: "If I were working for this group, being it's the holidays, I would send the major media stockings full of coal--with "Made In America, Good and Clean for America!" labels on the coal lumps--and urge them to "look at clean coal technology differently," by regaling all of coal's benefits (maybe a lucky winner should get a diamond :-)."

While I would have gone the strictly media campaign route, I find it interesting and laudable to turn on a dime and actually give out stockings full of coal to consumers as it's much more work and logistical coordination in a tight timeframe (and I bet they sent to the media too, so they likely did both).

Plus, they did this in multiple cities: there's a shot of them at the Capitol, and they were at Obama's Nevada campaign headquarters along with giving out coal (chocolates) in South Carolina and Iowa. So I guess coal is actually a political issue, too. Who knew? Yes, I'm kidding ;-). Bravo to America's Power for listening.

net net: All America's Power had to do was a link search and then participate in the discussion. And they did just that. And good things happened...well, a lot of people got coal for Christmas but in this case that turned out to be a good thing ;-).

Disclaimer: CK's blog, nor CK, does not endorse or, consequently, not endorse this company. She does, however, thoroughly endorse that companies start listening to bloggers/the conversation (conversations centering on their products and competitive ones).

Why?

Because be those bloggers marketing experts with great ideas or be they customers with great ideas to innovate or improve, it's always valuable feedback. And it's unbiased. Oh, and it's free. So that's why.

That's also why I also can't understand why more companies don't listen. Do they think free feedback isn't valuable? Is it valuable only if based on a fundamentally skewed and pricey system like the focus group? Or do they think that no bloggers could possibly have such insight and ingenuity?

Since the majority still don't listen, I'm left with more questions than answers. But, maybe we'll see that change a lot in 2008 ;-).

PS: Oh geez, where are my manners? I also want to thank Mack, Tom, Lewis and Toby for taking part in that discussion, along with all you great readers. Sorry 'bout that.

Let's create yet another strategy. Alternatively, we could just do our jobs.

This just in: "A study conducted on the trustworthiness of sources used to make purchases found that consumers rated word of mouth highest." This just in, too: "In the US, more than 9 in 10 respondents to a survey said that a friend's recommendation was the most important influence when it came to buying a product or service."

Did we ever really think that people trust communications from brands--brands that are trying to sell them something--more than feedback from friends, colleagues, people with like needs, strangers even...that are NOT trying to sell them something?

This is the first implication from the analyst: "In all these studies, word of mouth has more of an impact than traditional forms of advertising."

Yup. And the kicker? It always has.

WOM is as old as the hills, it's just that we didn't have as large a group to query because we didn't have these online tools. And we didn't always have the ability to type "Product Name + Sucks" into a search engine to see real feedback from real people who've really used the product.

And here's the second implication from the analyst: "Having a word-of-mouth marketing strategy is becoming essential for marketers."

Oy.

Please, oh please tell me that we understand that a WOM Strategy is a MARKETING strategy. If you do your marketing right--create value, innovate one helluva product, target the right prospect, differentiate well from competitors, create clever marketing programs, take care of customers after they've bought from you--then it follows that customers will be more prone to say great things about you and refer others to you. Be that talk online or in real-time.

Or they might not say anything.

Which is a heck of a lot better than talking badly about you.

To put it scientifically, what we've got here is a cause-and-effect situation. The cause is good marketing. The effect is positive WOM. Or less/no negative WOM (companies detest bad WOM more than they love good WOM, and for good reason).

The takeaway?

We don't need another strategy. We need marketers to do their core jobs. Which means LESS time strategizing on how to get people to say what marketers want them to say, MORE time listening to what they're actually saying (about your product or a competitive one).

And optimizing from there.

Why?

Because we don't need ten more strategies. We need ten better products. And because now we're accountable to the world. (That makes this marketer very happy.)

Perhaps I'm wrong and I need to go and create yet another strategy.

Listening: the proof is in the "process"

The last couple days I've been writing on the role that corporate blogs play in this space and the many rules of the road that companies need to grasp before diving in (it's not nearly as easy as it looks).  Which brings me full circle to social media processes. See, the companies and clients I've been talking with are talking a lot about tools. Next to nothing about processes.

Yikes.

Not all companies need to be blogging. But all companies need to be listening. After all, a key value proposition of social media is that it gives companies the ability to identify new markets, new opportunities, potential risks and needed improvements.

But the blogosphere can't give companies any of these benefits if they're not listening. Yet telling companies they need to listen--while all well and good--is pretty darn nebulous. It's like telling companies they need to be good to their customers.

That's why we need to be telling companies to instill processes specifically for:

Monitoring conversations. This cannot be a bot that merely generates results when your company name is cited. You need smart humans who understand what types of conversations are relevant to your current or future initiatives. And many times the important conversations won't even mention your company, but a competior. 

Monitoring the space for new blogs, bloggers and brand advocates. I cannot stress this enough: do not only follow the so-called A-List blogs or big names in your industry or markets. Remember, fads and trends always start on the fringes and...only over time...make their way to the mainstream.  Plus, you might be overlooking brand advocates simply because you're not paying attention.

Assessing when companies should touch and when they should only look. This is a case-by-case, convo-by-convo basis if ever there was one. Sometimes it's important to voice-in on a conversation, debate or discussion. But many times it's better to let the market discuss while you listen and learn. Consumers want to be heard, but don't want to feel like companies are meddling or trying to control their opinions.

Identifying opportunities to improve products/services, innovate new product categories and increase market share. It's best to view the blogosphere as a huge R&D think tank. Since the feedback is unbiased--save "pay for posts" or blatant attempts at getting companies' names mentioned--companies are afforded a vast (and free!) research vehicle. But companies need smart researchers who understand what feedback, and patterns thereof, signal opportunities and gaps.

Exploring the "next big thing" (and then the next one). Discern hype from hope on new technologies, new applications, methodologies and buzzwords. Sometimes the next big thing is just the old thing wrapped in new words (this happens all the time), and other times these technologies are worth investing time and budget in.

Scrutinizing marketing tactics. I'm a big fan of innovating but I'm also a fan of learning from others. Companies need to scrutinize new promotional programs and tactics, even ones that might not have been leveraged in their respective industry. Some blogger outreach programs have done well, others have failed miserably. Find out which and why and benchmark best practices from this information.

While these processes apply to all organizations, the way companies will implement them will vary. For some organizations these processes might be conducted by the marketing department. For others, these processes might be better suited for the research team. Or the company may already be spread too thin, or lack the needed competencies, and need to hire new professionals or retain a service provider.

But ultimately the responsibility rests with marketing. Because information is just that and a big part of these processes--and realizing their payoff--is moving from information to intelligence.  After all, the whole point of companies instilling these processes is to help shape their strategies, plans, communications, R&D efforts, budget spends, customer service practices, even promotions. 

net/net: if you want to determine whether or not a company is a good listener, just ask about their processes.  Oh, please correct me if I've overlooked any process above (I wouldn't want to be a bad listener).

Red bloggers see RED

While I spend (very) little time on the political side of the 'sphere, this is an interesting article. Interesting to me from both the "irrelevance" point (I'll get to that later)...and interesting how much more the opinions of bloggers are being monitored. From the article:

"But no issue in recent memory has united conservative bloggers like the debate over immigration. Their frustration has culminated in a full-scale revolt against the Bush administration and a Senate bill that activists say does little to solve the country's border security problems.

It's increasingly clear from Web postings and interviews with top conservative bloggers that the immigration bill has done serious damage to the president's credibility among the conservative netroots, the grassroots bloggers on the Web.

Said Morrissey: 'I think that they are going to continue to support him on the war on terror. As for the rest of it, they are looking for ways to reshape the party agenda going into the next election. That's a nice way of saying they are going to consider him irrelevant.'"

I've always admired what I call the "strategy of irrelevance" as it can be very effective...but what I'm most enjoying is how the conservative community's voice is being heard loud and clear by media and, in-turn, the general public (and I'm not against the immigration bill--and if you haven't noticed, I'm not conservative, either--so that comes from a place of delight that bloggers are being heard, dig?).

In recent months I've seen a dramatic increase in companies and media outlets leveraging social media to "listen" and of course I couldn't be more pleased. Sure we've got a ways to go but there is definite interest over "what's being said in here". I'll cover that stuff and provide specific examples in upcoming posts but it will continue to be a theme (and hopefully, a trend).

I'm not watching, but I am listening (and definitely buying).

The last time I really watched a TV show was when "Six Feet Under" exited the airwaves. Before that, as you regular readers know, it was Buffy (laugh all you want the writing was brilliant; even scholars from Oxford University agree).

During the last six minutes of Six Feet Under they featured a character montage that was so moving and set against such soulful, if haunting, music it moved me to tears. Actually I all-out wept. Four times over two days. As a result, my friends have banned me from ever watching it again as I was such a mess of a host at what was supposed to be our super fun "season finale taco and beer party" (you can see the montage here, but I doubt it will have the same impact unless you regularly watched the show).

Sure, I watch the news regularly. But besides that staple, I now "listen" to TV far more than I "watch" it. For instance, that song (Breathe Me by Sia) playing through the Six Feet Under montage? I bought that goodie right after it aired. In fact my playlists are full of shows I "listen" to, like:

• Grey is annoying, but the music isn't. I don't watch "Grey's Anatomy"--I'm just not drawn to these characters--the lead female gets on my last nerve and that lead Doctor lacks depth and isn't "McDreamy" at all. But the one episode I did watch prompted me to buy a song (Chasing Cars by Snow Patrol). I'll buy more songs from Snow Patrol but not watch any more Grey.
• Well, at least the music didn't sell-out. "Nip/Tuck" used to be TV's bravest series...before selling its soul and every shred of dignity in Season 3. Many thought the show was about ego-heavy plastic surgeons (well, now it is). But Seasons 1-2 chronicled the two primary characters working to better themselves from the inside while everyone else tried to better themselves from the outside, vis-a-vis a lot of breast implants and liposuction (the patients never got better just bigger, or skinnier). But in the Season 4 Finale, they wrapped up the myriad plots vis-a-vis a video featuring a very apt song (Brighter Discontent by The Submarines). I doubt I'll watch the new season but I did buy that song the very next day.
• The only one I don't want whacked is the score. I'm trying to get into "The Sopranos" being it's the final season. But I'm just not feeling it. I am feeling the score, though. Take the song they played the week before last: it was so spot-on and chilling that myself and others are trying to buy it...but can't (Evidently Chickentown by John Cooper Clarke). Either the producers are really smart in trying to build demand for their upcoming "final season score" or really stupid to have overlooked it being available on their site, iTunes, or anywhere else. What's particularly interesting about this song? It's nearly thirty year's old. No worries, it's new to a lot of us who want to buy it, and want to buy it right now.

My point is that music seems to be the best product placement...and the best advertising...when it's done right. When done well the music can either become its own character on the show or give more context, and depth, to the show's existing characters. Move me to listen--heck, move me to tears--and you've moved me to buy. That's advertising I've no problem listening to (and if TV shows improve I might even start watching again).

Oh Marketers, Your Motives Are Showing (and you shine).

I wanted to create something that reflects what we value about this medium--and it's just not fair that posts get all the play when the comments have so many insights, and so much heart. Remember way back before Labor Day when I polled you guys? Of course you don't, a lot has happened since then. All the better...surprising you was part of my evil-genius plan.

I asked you one question. A BIG one: What is the single greatest point of value you receive from blogging? I sought the single, the uber, the most rewarding, robust and important point of value you receive from embracing these tools and investing your time.

The question centered on value because everything we do stems from there. Take choices: what we choose to do with our careers, which candidate we vote for, whom we choose to be our friends and how we choose to spend our time all rest in value. Same thing with motives: we're motivated and driven by those things and thoughts that hold the most value for us. So value isn't just a telling factor, it's the tell-tale factor.

With a bevy of wide-ranging results in hand I was going to make a video. But then everyone's comments flew by too fast for a 2-minute piece. So I was going to do a podcast...but having all your comments in my voice killed the whole point. It needed to be visual. Truth be told, I really wanted a mural. But where to find the wall? Plus, I can't paint for the life of me.

Most of all, it needed to depict everyone's individual contributions and then show how a lot of individual voices make for a larger, dynamic and far more powerful conversation. After all, that's what the blogosphere is, right?

So I settled on a collage (PDF here). A compilation of why--above all else--we invest the thought, time and trouble to blog. Look at what it reflects. Then look at what it doesn't. (psst: what's not on it is just as important as what is.)

I see a lot of value attributed to smarts, relationships and growth...not so much attributed to money, power and fame. In a time where marketers are called every name in the book, when findings show we're increasingly at a remove from our markets and articles claim we care far more about money than relationships, it gives me great pride to show the motivations of the marketers in this community--which increases in voices and power every single day. Thank you.

While I could only fit the keywords on the collage, full comments from each participant are listed on pages 2-5 of the document. Take ten minutes and read through them sometime. You'll likely draw the same conclusion as I but come up with different observations--yet another point of value we gain through blogging, eh?

Feel free to take a copy of it, it's yours after all.

PS: If you don't prefer downloading a PDF, a rich media version of the collage is right here.

nifty. sassy. better than a yummy paperback...

That's some of the feedback my little blog has garnered in the handful of months since its inception. It's also been labeled "entertaining", "friendly", and "personal without being personal" (so I guess impersonally personal?).

Another called one of my posts cheesy. Then another countered it was awesome. Indeed, one man's trash is another man's treasure. Like companies, I could do several things with the feedback:

• Reinvent: I could decide I don't like what I'm hearing and reinvent myself into something I'm not. And alienate all my readers and credibility in the process. That doesn't sound too nifty an option...yet many companies do just this.
• Rationalize: I could rationalize the feedback to serve my own agenda (hmmm..."sassy" actually means "the smartest, snazziest, bestest blog yet!"). But denial is a dead-end--which too many companies follow to their fateful end.
• Listen (really listen): I could take the valuable feedback with the honesty (and generosity) in which it was given and use it to understand my value, build upon my strengths and improve my weaknesses. Yeah, I'll take this one.
  

You gotta be objective with yourself and your company. A very hard, if not impossible, thing to do. That's why feedback is invaluable. Unsolicited feedback is preferred--it's best when you don't ask people how they feel, just let 'em feel it and then communicate it to you on their terms.

What does your company (or your clients) do with feedback: reinvent, rationalize or really listen?