The new season of Mad Men is upon us and with it a glimpse into the not-so-fictional historical perspective of the ad agency in the early days of television. Ah, the glory days.

It wasn’t really that long ago that agency media planning meetings started with, “OK. So what are we going to do on TV?” TV was the go-to medium. Not only that, it was the aspirational medium. Brands would yearn for the day that they had the budget to finally do TV. Until then, they were relegated to radio or magazine or newspaper advertising. While those media certainly worked, they just weren’t sexy. And you didn’t get seats court-side at a Laker’s game for buying local newspaper. (Timberwolves?)

When surveying the current media landscape one is left wondering if the Internet is the new TV without the court-side seats. (“Internet” and “court-side seats” reminds me of the joke, “Is that the banjo player’s Porsche?” See? Doesn’t work.) Of all media it has become the single channel in which all brands must exist. Can you imagine a media plan without an Internet component? Almost seems ridiculous, right? Yet, while we might all agree that the Internet has become the great equalizer — meaning that the tools exist where there are few if any barriers to entry, unlike television — it is still the least understood. It is also by a long shot the most complicated of all media.

Let’s run it down:

1. Internet strategies require integrated internal teams of business, creative and technical minds. These people don’t usually even share the same office floors. They may even have their own Christmas parties. (I bet they don’t sleep together either. Did you see last week’s MM episode!? Did you like my creative use of bold lettering? Made ya look, didn’t I?)
2. Internet strategies require a deep understanding of consumer behavior and technology preferences. This means creative begins with data.
3. The Internet is inherently social where brands are interpreted, shared, dissected, and redefined by consumers. And this is a good thing.
4. The shiniest of campaigns (i.e. the most sexy) are rarely the most successful.

In the large scheme of things, there are only a handful of CMOs who have ever lead organizations that enable these challenges to flourish. There are still a pile of CMOs who are in their positions because they killed it in television. There are a lot of Don Drapers in the role. We are just beginning to see the first generation of digital natives in the CMO role, and as such, we are just beginning to see what the Internet can really do. We in the industry tend to celebrate individual campaigns — The Subservient Chicken, Old Spice Guy, and the like — but rarely do you read about or see CMOs raising trophies for leading highly integrated teams that kill it on the Internet. And by “kill it” I mean they consistently provide their consumers with indispensable user experiences that inform, entertain, and serve useful purposes day in and day out that ultimately drive profitable sales or dependable customer service or loyalty or all the above, all at once.

If I could make a prediction, I don’t think we’ll really see the market celebrate these types of leaders until TV and radio, in particular, become just as interactive as the Internet. At that point, marketers will be out of options in finding a channel where a linear “create-buy-wait-rinse-repeat” media plan will work. When TV and radio go interactive, interruptive advertising dies and so with it the entire methodology of 20th Century advertising.

So, are you prepared? Assume TV and other traditional forms are moving ahead towards their obvious interactive futures. Will you be ready? I’d recommend you start killing it on the Internet beginning with your own internal marketing teams. First things first, you need the data people and the creative people sitting next to each other working in concert. They need to challenge each other, not feed files back and forth.

Basically, become digital-first companies. Start with digital and move outwards. If you must use television or radio or newspapers or magazines — and many of you must — then use your data to mine for audiences and messaging which then becomes the basis for targeting offline advertising buys. Use digital channels to test the b’jeebus out of creative concepts, audience segments, and calls-to-action or engagement opportunities, then go with your best foot forward into your traditional programs. It’s not an either-or world. The Internet provides you with an insurance policy against monstrous failure and a breeding ground for incredible success across all channels.

Use it. Love it. Live it. You’re out of options. Be the 21st Century Draper.

–
Andrew Eklund :: Founder & CEO
Ciceron :: Digital Marketing
www.ciceron.com
612.230.3901 :: LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/andreweklund
Professional Twitter: @HeavyThinking
Personal Twitter: @aeklund

I’m thrilled to be moderating an upcoming Minnesota Interactive Marketing Association (MIMA) panel on “Integrated Communications.” My panelists are powerhouses of marketing, and as such, this is going to be a great discussion. Please see the deets here and REGISTER! I think you’ll learn a lot and enjoy the event.

I am by far no conspiracy theorist, but the silence from the education community to last week’s indictment of their field I am going to take as a plea of “guilty.” Until I hear otherwise.

Please go back and read the follow-on comments to the post, and you’ll notice that no one seems to be coming to education’s defense in this argument. If this is the case, then I argue that we need to do something about it. We can’t continue to allow students to enter the marketing and advertising workforce unprepared to think strategically about how the web and the entire digital environment has changed the game. I think we can all agree to that.

But I don’t want to use this blog as a bully pulpit. Rather, let’s imagine some practical solutions. Here’s a start…

Option One: Opening Our Doors

All of us in the digital consulting and agency world should open our doors to allow university and college professors the opportunity to “audit” our real-world classrooms. They should be allowed to ask questions, come to client meetings, and participate in strategy discussions. If they would like training on how to use certain tools (like Google Analytics or Radian6), then we should allow them to look over our shoulders.

Because we are taking the time to provide ongoing training that may become an unexpected drain on limited resources, I would like to posit that we who participate should receive a tax credit. There needs to be an incentive in addition to pure altruism. Finding a treasure of altruism coming out of this recession may be harder to find than you’d expect.

Option Two: Encourage Adjunct Teaching

This is no new idea. I have taught many classes over the years as a guest lecturer and have taught a full semester at the College of Continuing Education at the U of M. It  makes  sense that those in the current market are going to have a more practical viewpoint on what students need to know to compete for employment in this tough job market. I don’t know what the attitude within the academy is towards adjunct and guest lecturing, but I hope it’s encouraged. If there isn’t a good database of volunteer adjunct faculty, then there should be. Anyone interested in building it? Know of one already? Link to it in the comments section.

Option Three: Audit Current Curricula

A panel of advertising and marketing executives (CEOs, owners, agency heads) should be assembled to take a very close look at what’s currently being taught and help fill the gaps between current curricula and reality. This panel should be consultative, not critical. It should recommend resources, from web sites to bloggers to Twitter follows, podcasts, video blogs, and RSS feeds. You’ll note I didn’t mention books. This is not to say that very current books shouldn’t be included, rather that books are overrepresented as the preferred medium in teaching digital, when taught at all. If there is a “smoking gun” between the economics of book sales for an institution and curricula, then let’s be big boys and girls and snuff it out.

Frankly, I think all three options, working in concert, may be a good beginning solution to the problems in marketing education. But there must be many better ideas out there, existing programs that we’re unaware of, or points-of-view that would suggest I’m all wet. I welcome all of those ideas, beginning with the comment section below. Perhaps there should be a forum on the topic. Minnesota Business? You interested in hosting an event? A conversation?

Thanks again for reading this blog. If you know people in education who can add their perspective, please forward them links to these pages. I’m not trying to go to battle; I’m trying to see if we can pull together and solve a problem.